Patna High Court
Md. MahtabversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioner no.2 (Md. Imtiyaz) subject to conditions and allowed the withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application for petitioner no.1 (Md. Mahtab).
Summary
The petitioners, Md. Mahtab and Md. Imtiyaz, sought anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 64 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for alleged rape offences. The petitioners argued that the earlier order mistakenly named Md. Mustafa instead of Md. Mahtab, and therefore requested withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application for Mahtab and a fresh filing. They also contended that Imtiyaz, the elder brother of Mahtab, was falsely implicated and that the alleged victim was already married with children, making the complaint spurious. The State opposed the bail but did not dispute the claim about the victim’s marital status. The court allowed the withdrawal of the application for Mahtab, and granted anticipatory bail to Imtiyaz subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of Md. Mahtab should be withdrawn due to misidentification in the impugned order.
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to Md. Imtiyaz despite allegations of rape and claims of false implication.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 3(5), 482(2), 64
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- rape
- false implication
- misidentification
- Section 64 BNSS
- Section 3(5) BNSS
- Section 482(2) BNSS
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18810 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-242 Year-2025 Thana- JALE District- Darbhanga
======================================================
1. Md. Mahtab S/O Md. Mustak @ Laddu Nalband R/O Village- Doghra, P.S-
Jale, Distt.- Darbhanga.
2. Md. Imtiyaj Nalband S/O Md. Mustak @ Laddu Nalband R/O Village-
Doghra, P.S- Jale, Distt.- Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raja Ram Rai, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 64 and
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners very fairly at
the outset submits that from perusal of the order impugned, it
would manifest that the same is with respect to Mustafa and
Imteyaz but then the instant anticipatory bail application has
been filed on behalf of Md. Mahtab and Md. Imteyaz when Md.
Mahtab was not a petitioner in the order impugned. Learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18810 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
2/4
counsel for the petitioners thus seeks permission to withdraw
the anticipatory bail application with respect to petitioner no.1,
namely, Md. Mahtab with liberty to file afresh after getting the
order impugned dated 17.02.2026 in ABP No.128/2026
rectified, as it has been submitted that it was Md. Mahtab who
had approached the learned District Court along with Imteyaz
seeking anticipatory bail but then inadvertently instead of Md.
Mahtab, name of Md. Mustafa was recorded in the order.
4. Permission is accorded.
5. It is next submitted that the petitioner no.2 is a
person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that Md.
Mahtab about an year back with help of his friend raped her and
made a video of the occurrence and thereafter repeatedly
committed rape on threat of making the video viral and even got
her aborted on several occasion, it is next allegd that being fed
up with the conduct of Md. Mahtab, she threatened that a case
would be instituted even if the video is made viral, on which
Md. Mahtab promised to marry her and thereafter took her to his
village where on 27.11.2025, the elder brother of Mahtab
namely Imteyaz (petitioner) committed rape.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case being
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18810 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
3/4
brother of Mahtab. It is next submitted that no doubt Mahtab
and the informant were in a relationship and were known to
each other but then Mahtab came to know that informant was a
married woman. It is next submitted that a specific pleading has
been made at Para-10 of the anticipatory bail application that
victim was married to Atmaja Akbar, resident of village Balha,
P.S. Visfi, District- Madhubani and out of the wedlock she has
two children. It is thus submitted that when Mahtab came to
know that informant was married from before and was having
children as such their relationship soured when the instant false
case came to be instituted alleging that petitioner being elder
brother of Mahtab committed rape. It is submitted that petitioner
has been implicated only with a view to coerce Mahtab into
submission.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the informant does not dispute the
submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner that victim was married from before and out of the
wedlock two children were born.
8. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18810 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
4/4
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner no.2, above-named, in
the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
court where the case is pending/successor court in connection
with Jale P.S. Case No. 242 of 2025, subject to the conditions as
laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…