Patna High Court
Amir Khan @ Aamir KhanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Summary
Amir Khan applied for anticipatory bail after learning that a complaint had been lodged against him under Section 498A of the IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. He alleged that the complaint was false, claiming that he and the complainant, Farzana Khatoon, had mutually consented to a talaq on 7 September 2022, as evidenced by annexed documents. No counsel appeared on behalf of the complainant. The State opposed the bail application. The Court, after considering the petitioner's submissions, ordered that he be released on anticipatory bail if arrested or surrendered within six weeks, upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the conditions of Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
- Whether the complaint under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 D.P. Act is a false or frivolous proceeding.
- Whether the mutual consent talaq alleged by the petitioner defeats the prosecution's case.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 498A
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- IPC 498A
- Dowry Prohibition Act
- mutual consent talaq
- false complaint
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51882 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-678 Year-2023 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT
District- West Champaran
======================================================
Amir Khan @ Aamir Khan S/O Mohn Hasan Resident of Shakurpur I-200,
Saraswati Bihar, North-West Delhi, P.S- Netaji Subhash Palace, Delhi.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Farzana Khatoon D/O Riyaz Ahmad R/O Baswariya Masjid Mohalla, Ward
No. 30, P.S- Bettiah Town, Distt.- West Chamaran
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Md. Irfanul Haque, Advocate
Ms. Anjali Kumari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Kumar Ranjit Ranjan, APP
For the Complainant : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma, Advocate
Mr. Sharad Kumar Verma, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State. None appears on behalf of O.P. No.2.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered
for the offences punishable under Section 498(A) of the Indian
Penal Code and Section 4 of D.P. Act.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that
petitioner being husband has been falsely implicated in the
instant case by O.P. No.2. It is also submitted that petitioner and
O.P. No.2 by way of mutual consent have taken Talaq, as would
manifest from Annexure-P/2 series at page 27. It is further
submitted that Talaq by mutual consent was obtained on 7th of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51882 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/2
September, 2022 and thereafter the instant false complaint case
came to be instituted. It is next submitted that this perhaps
explains why no one appears on behalf of O.P. No.2 to contest
the case.
4. Learned APP for the State opposes the anticipatory
bail application.
5. Considering the submissions made by learned
counsel for the petitioner, let petitioner, above named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Bettiah
(West Champaran) in connection with Complaint Case
No.678C/2023, subject to the conditions laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…