Allowed¶24

Rajesh Kumar Ranjan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC28 Aug 2024CR. MISC./51915/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

pre-arrest bail; anticipatory bail; Section 376 IPC; false promise of marriage; consensual relationship; refusal to marry; adults/majors; Complaint Case No. 1662 (c) of 2023, Bhojpur; Naim Ahmed v. State (NCT of Delhi) 2023 SCC Online SC 89; Sonu @ Subash Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. 2021 AIR SC 1405; Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.; bail bond Rs. 10,000; A.C.J.M. Bhojpur Arrah; Patna High Court; Purnendu Singh, J; 28-08-2024

What did the court decide?

Pre-arrest bail granted: petitioner to be released on arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., 7th, Bhojpur, Arrah, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1662 (c) of 2023, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Rajesh Kumar Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, accused under Section 376 IPC in Complaint Case No. 1662 (c) of 2023, should be granted pre-arrest bail. +1 more

¶17

Court's answer

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner was directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., 7th, Bhojpur, Arrah, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1662 (c) of 2023.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

The grant of pre-arrest bail was made subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶26

Key takeaways

The Court relied on the observations of the Apex Court in Naim Ahmed v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Sonu @ Subash Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. — that a complainant capable of understanding the consequences of her actions cannot lodge a Section 376 FIR merely because the relationship does not work out — and, applying this to the facts, granted pre-arrest bail.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Purnendu Singh, J.), Criminal Miscellaneous No.51915 of 2024, decided 28-08-2024: Application for pre-arrest bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 1662 (c) of 2023, District Bhojpur, alleging physical relations on a false promise of marriage followed by refusal to marry (Sections 376 IPC). Counsel for the petitioner urged that both parties were majors, the relationship was consensual over several months, and the petitioner had clean antecedents. Reliance was placed on the Apex Court's observations in Naim Ahmed v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2023 SCC Online SC 89, and Sonu @ Subhash Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., 2021 AIR SC 1405, that failure of such a relationship cannot ground a Section 376 FIR. Bail granted: release ordered within four weeks of arrest/surrender on a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of like amount each to learned A.C.J.M., 7th, Bhojpur, Arrah, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51915 of 2024

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1662 Year-2023 Thana- BHOJPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Bhojpur

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Rajesh Kumar Ranjan, age 27, Male, Son of Raja Ram Paswan, R/o VillageYogeya, P.S.- Bikramganj, District- Rohtas, Bihar

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar

¶8

Lavli Paswan, D/o Satish Chandra, R/o Village - Malaur, P.s.- Charpokhari, District- Bhojpur.

¶9

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶10

======================================================

¶11

Appearance :

¶12

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Surendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shantanu Kumar, APP

¶13

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶14

2 28-08-2024

¶15

Heard Mr. Surendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel

¶16

appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Shantanu Kumar, learned APP for the State.

¶17

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 1662 (c) of 2023 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 376 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioner made physical relation with complainant on the false promise of marriage, and, thereafter, refused to marry.

¶19

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that when the relationship developed

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51915 of 2024(2) dt.28-08-2024 2/3

¶21

between both the parties, they were major. From perusal of the complaint, it is apparent that both parties were in relationship for quite some time and enjoyed each other’s company for months together and indulged in sexual act and as such, it cannot be said to be induced or involuntarily. The relationship was consensual. Petitioner has got clean antecedent.

¶22

Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

¶23

The Apex Court has observed that “the complainant was very much capable of understanding the consequences of her action and if the relationship is not working out, the same cannot be ground for lodging an F.I.R for the offence under Section 376 of I.P.C” in case of Naim Ahmed Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) , reported in 2023 SCC Online SC 89 and in the case of Sonu @ Subash Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., reported in 2021 AIR SC 1405.

¶24

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51915 of 2024(2) dt.28-08-2024 3/3

¶26

A.C.J.M., 7^th , Bhojpur, Arrah in connection with Complaint Case No. 1662 (c) of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

¶27

(Purnendu Singh, J)

¶28

Sanjay/-

¶29

U T

Rajesh Kumar Ranjan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Ranjan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devanti Devi @ Dewanti Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Devendra Kumar Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Salma Tarannum Vs The State Of Bihar and Ors.

Rajendra Prasad Gond @ Rajendra Prasad @ Raghvendra Prasad Gond Vs The State of Bihar

Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Fulo Sada Vs The State Of Bihar