Patna High Court
Md. Mustaque @ FuchcheversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Mustaque, was implicated in a case of alleged abduction and attempted sale of a girl to a brothel under Sections 137(2), 96, 3(5) of the BNS and Sections 363, 366A/34 of the IPC. The victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC indicated a consensual relationship with the petitioner and that she was a major at the time, thereby not supporting the prosecution’s case. The petitioner asserted a clean antecedent and highlighted that co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail in a related matter. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, but the court considered the victim’s testimony, the petitioner’s clean record, and the precedent of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the court ordered bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and imposed conditions under Section 482(2) CrPC, including cooperation with the trial and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail under Section 482(2) of the CrPC given the nature of the offences alleged.
- Whether the victim’s statement and the petitioner’s clean antecedent justify the grant of bail.
- Whether the anticipatory bail granted to co‑accused influences the bail decision for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164, 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 366A
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- abduction
- IPC
- CrPC
- victim statement
- clean antecedent
- Section 482(2)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4231 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-223 Year-2024 Thana- JOGBANI District- Araria
======================================================
Md. Mustaque @ Fuchche Son of Md. Mujjit @ Majid Resident Of Village
-Ahmadpur, Ward No 13, Police Station -Jogbani, District- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Murli Dhar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 06-02-2026 Heard Mr. Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Murli Dhar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No. 223 of 2024, F.I.R. dated
07.11.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 137 (2),
96, 3(5) of the BNS and Section 363, 366(A)/34 of the IPC.
3. According to prosecution case, it is alleged in the
FIR that a co-villager informed the informant that the FIR
named accused persons have abducted her daughter with intent
to sell her in brothel.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4231 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
2/4
F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed
any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the
coordinate Bench of this Court while the hearing the case of the
co-accused persons who happens to be the family members of
the petitioner which was recorded in paragraph 4 is as follows:
“4. Vide order dated 21.03.2025, case
diary along with statement of the victim recorded
under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was called for. The same
has been produced. I have perused the statement of
the victim, from which it appears that victim has
admitted that she was in love relationship with one
Md. Mustaque, who is son of petitioners no.1 and 2.
She has also admitted that she has willingly gone
along with co-accused Md. Mustaque. Petitioners
no.3 and 4 are own brothers of Md. Mustaque and
sons of petitioner nos.1 and 2.”
5. It appears from the aforesaid that the victim has
not supported the case of the prosecution and she admitted that
she was in love with the petitioner and she is in relationship
with the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also refers
to Annexure 2 which suggests that the date of birth of the victim
is 28.03.1999 and at the time of occurrence the victim was a
major. He further submits that the co-accused persons, namely,
Md. Mujjit @ Majid @ Md. Majjit & Others have already been
granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in
Cr. Misc. No. 9966 of 2025 vide order dated 12.05.2025.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4231 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
3/4
6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and that the petitioner has clean antecedent, victim has not
supported the prosecution case and the co-accused persons have
granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, let
the petitioner, above named, in the event of his 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 learned
C.J.M., Araria in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No. 223 of
2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and with other
following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4231 of 2026(2) dt.06-02-2026
4/4
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…