Navnit Jha @ Navnit Shubhkant Jha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4707 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-96 Year-2025 Thana- Nehra District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Navnit Jha @ Navnit Shubhkant Jha S/O Shubhkant Jha @ Shubhkant Murlidhar Jha R/O Village- Raghopur,PS-Nehra,District- Darbhanga at present residing at 403,B-34,B Wing Vridavan Unit No.4, General A.K.Vaidya Marg, Krishnavatika Temple, Gokuldham, PS- Goregoan East, District- Suburban, Mumbai, Maharashtra ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Nagendra Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms.Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-03-2026 1.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2.
The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that he received an information by his aunt on 6-6-2025 at 9:31 pm that his mother committed suicide, accordingly he reached DMCH, it is next alleged that while his mother was staying at Mumbai, she was tortured by his father, uncle (petitioner), and grand-father, thus his mother along with him
2/4 left Mumbai and came back to Dhanbad and started staying at their maternal grand-father's place, thus alleges that his mother committed suicide on account of torture meted out by the accused persons, next allege that his father is a drunkard and used to assault and abuse and demanded jewellery and money from his mother, which she had saved, for the purposes of drinking.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant, being uncle. It is next submitted that it is not in dispute that father of the informant is a drunkard, but then petitioner was not staying with his brother at Mumbai rather was living separately in his own house. It is also submitted that mother of the informant used to complain about her husband, but then petitioner and his father did not interfere in the family matters for the reason that his brother was not willing to listen to them, as such the mother of the informant along with the informant came back to Dhanbad and started staying with her parents, where she committed suicide, it is next submitted that it appears that by way of afterthought, the instant FIR came to be instituted implicating the petitioner and his father also. It is submitted that the date of occurrence is 6-6-2025 and the FIR
3/4 came to be instituted on 5-7-2025, i.e., after a delay of more than 29 days and the FIR was seen by the learned CJM on 10-72025. It is next submitted that had the petitioner and his father been torturing the victim at Mumbai, in that event, the victim might have committed suicide at Mumbai, but then she came back to Dhanbad, being fed up with the conduct of her husband. It is also submitted that petitioner works for movie Director, Prakash Jha and thus is involved in his work and is a busy person and it appears that after the death of his Bhabhi, his nephew, at the behest of his relatives from maternal side, instituted the instant FIR after a delay of more than 29 days. It is further submitted that even allegation of torture is general and omnibus in nature. It is submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
5.
Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6.
Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner 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
4/4 of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Nehra P.S. Case No. 96 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Sumit/- U T