Nawaz Sharif @ Nawaj Sharif v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42161 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2026 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- West Champaran ====================================================== Nawaz Sharif @ Nawaj Sharif S/O Md. Mustufa Ansari @ Mustapha Ansari R/O- Puraina, Pandey Tola, PS- Chanpatia, District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta,Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Navin Kr. Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER 02-07-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and apprehending his arrest in connection with Bettiah Mahila P.S. Case No. 07 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 69, 115(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of BNS.
3. As per FIR petitioner alleged by informant that he established physical relationship with her on false pretext of marriage on several occasions. It is also alleged that informant lived with petitioner as a wife for long two years at Delhi.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42161 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026 2/3 behalf of the petitioner that informant is already a married lady having two children and due to certain disputes with her first husband, she started to live alone alongwith her parents. It is submitted that the informant is habitual to lodge such a false case and in support of his submission learned counsel referred to Annexure P/5 of the present bail petition, where prior to lodging this case, she already extorted Rs. 80,000/- from one Sarfuddin Ansari for not lodging criminal case with same allegation. It is submitted that if the allegation as raised through FIR be accepted for a while, it can be safely gathered that the marriage was not solemnized due to interference of the family members of the petitioner. It is nowhere alleged that the petitioner refused to marry with informant and therefore, the allegation qua establishing physical relationship by deceitful means not appears convincing as to attract the allegations within the meaning of Section 69 of BNS. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
5.Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail.
6. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42161 of 2026(2) dt.02-07-2026 3/3 taking note of fact as prima-facie FIR not suggest that marriage of petitioner could not solemnized due to refusal of petitioner, rather it suggest that it was the family members of the petitioner due to whom the marriage of informant could not solemnized with petitioner, accordingly petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks, is directed to be released on bail, furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned SDJM, West Champaran, Bettiah /concerned Court, where the case is pending in connection with Bettiah Mahila P.S. Case No. 07 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J) Sudha/- U T