Patna High Court
Shashikant Kumar @ Shashikant MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Shashikant Kumar, was accused of raping a woman and threatening her brother under Sections 64 and 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He sought anticipatory bail, arguing that the FIR was lodged five months after the alleged incident, there was no medical evidence of sexual assault, and he had prior contact with the informant, suggesting a false allegation. The prosecution opposed the bail, but the court noted the unexplained delay, lack of medical proof, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the prior communications between the parties. Considering these factors, the court was inclined to grant anticipatory bail. The order released the petitioner on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a rape case where the FIR is delayed and there is no medical evidence.
- Whether the prior contact between the petitioner and the informant undermines the credibility of the allegation.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal record warrants bail despite serious charges.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183, 351(2), 64
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- rape
- delay in FIR
- medical evidence
- false allegation
- Criminal Procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29158 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-61 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Madhubani
======================================================
Shashikant Kumar @ Shashikant Mahto Son of Rajendra Mahto Resident of
Village - Kaithahi, Police Station - Rajnagar, District - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Md. Soban Asghar, Advocate
Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 17-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Madhubani Mahila P.S. Case No. 61 of 2025,
F.I.R dated 15.10.2025 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 64, 351(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, when the mother of
the informant went for singing in marriage ceremony, the
petitioner entered in the house of the informant and forcibly
raped the informant by closing her mouth with clothes. Further,
the petitioner has threatened that if she discloses the matter, he
will kill the brother of the informant. According to doctor, the
victim is pregnant.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that the false allegation of rape has been levelled against this
petitioner for malicious reasons and the occurrence is said to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29158 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
2/4
have taken place on 20th of May, 2025 as stated in the FIR while
the FIR has been instituted on 15.10.2025, almost after five
months of the alleged occurrence, which clearly shows that
there has been an afterthought and a ploy to implicate this
petitioner and there is no plausible explanation for such delay.
It has next been submitted that during course of investigation, it
has cropped up that the informant and this petitioner were in
contact, which is evident from the C.D.R. which has been
placed in the case diary, which shows that the informant was
constantly in touch with this petitioner since 06.04.2025 and this
fact has been concealed by the informant, while recording her
statement under Section 183 of the B.N.S.S., and these material
facts are missing. It has next been submitted that as per
allegations the pregnancy has also been terminated and there is
no material to show that the informant was ever pregnant except
the allegations of physical relations having been established. As
per, Para 42 of the case diary which is the conclusion of the
Medical Board which goes to show that there is no medical
evidence of sexual assault found at the time of examination. The
learned senior counsel for the petitioner further submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as
alleged in the FIR and he has been falsely implicated in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29158 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
3/4
case. The petitioner has got clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts that there is
unexplainable delay in lodging the F.I.R. i.e., after five months
from the date of alleged incident, according to the Medical
Board, there is no medical evidence of sexual assault found at
the time of examination, and the fact that the petitioner and the
informant were in touch from before, the petitioner has got no
criminal antecedent, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege
of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a
period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the Court of learned District & Additional
Sessions Judge-V, Madhubani, in connection with the aforesaid
P.S. Case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of
the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following
conditions:-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29158 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
4/4
(i) one of the bailors should
be the family member/relative/known
of the petitioner(s) who shall provide
official document/personal affidavit to
show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall
appear on each and every date before
the Trial Court and failure to do so for
two consecutive dates without
plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond
by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in
no way try to induce or promise or
threat the witnesses or tamper with the
evidences, failing which the State
shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall
desist from committing any criminal
offence again, failing which the State
shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
suryadev/rajan
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.