Jamrul @ Md. Jamrul v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14189 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2025 Thana- PAHARKATTA District- Kishanganj ====================================================== Jamrul @ Md. Jamrul S/o Imamuddin R/o Village- Malbasti Paharkatta, P.SPaharkatta, Dist- Kishanganj. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Raj Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 24-06-2026 Heard Mr. Raj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ram Pravesh Kumar, learned counsel representing the informant as also learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Paharkatta P.S. Case No. 102 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 64(1), 352 and 3(5), lodged on 21.08.2025 by the informant Mausmi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the lady who is married to the petitioner's brother alleged that her husband is residing outside in the State of Sikkim for livelihood and in the night when she went out to attend the nature's call, the petitioner dragged her and subsequently committed rape, when she went to the petitioner's wife to complain, was abused/assaulted. She
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14189 of 2026(4) dt.24-06-2026 2/2 informed her husband and later, complaint which turned into the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is land dispute between the parties, the husband of the complainant is own brother of the petitioner, there is delay in making the complaint, the Police submitted final form but later, cognizance taken initiating the present anticipatory bail.
5. Learned counsel for the informant on the other hand submits that the statement of the victim lady has come alongwith case diary and it clearly supports the prosecution story. The petitioner despite being own brother of the informant's husband committed rape of her.
6. Taking into account the submission of the parties as also the allegation that has come against him which has been reiterated by the complainant, no relief can be extended to the petitioner.
7. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T