Patna High Court - Orders
Badshah Sai @ Badshah vs The State Of Bihar on 1 April, 2026
Author: Sunil Dutta Mishra
Bench: Sunil Dutta Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7396 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-211 Year-2025 Thana- KOPA District- Saran
======================================================
Badshah Sai @ Badshah Son of Hamid Sha @ Hamid Sai R/o Village -
Piyano, P.S.- Kopa, Dist.- Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aniket Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
Mr. Ram Binod Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 01-04-2026Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Kopa P.S. Case No. 211 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 126(2), 74, 75, 78 & 96 of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, on the date of occurrence one Lakshman Sah called the minor daughter of informant in an orchard where petitioner along with other accused persons molested the victim and committed obscene acts with her and also took photo of the same. It is further alleged that the accused persons including the petitioner lured and kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7396 of 2026(4) dt.01-04-2026 2/3 case. There is delay of two days in lodging the F.I.R. There was love affairs between the victim and co-accused Lakshman Sah. Victim was not kidnapped rather she had gone with her own will with Lakshman Sah. Petitioner who is co-villager when objected to the victim going with Lakshman Sah, he has been implicated in this case.
5. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submit that the victim in her statement specifically stated that petitioner had made video recording from his mobile when co-accused Saddam Sai was molesting her. It is further submitted that the anticipatory bail petition of co-accused Saddam Sai @ Saddam Hussain, who is on the similar footing as that of the petitioner, has been rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 15.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 88764 of 2025.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submission of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegation and the victim girl has supported the allegation against the petitioner in her statement recorded under Section 180 and 183 Cr.P.C., this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7396 of 2026(4) dt.01-04-2026 3/3 anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.
(Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) rakhi/-
U T