Ajaz Ansari @ Ajaz Alam v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9461 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2025 Thana- BANJARIA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ajaz Ansari @ Ajaz Alam, Son of Khurshid Ansari @ Khurshed Alam, Resident of Village- Siswa Kachahariya Tola P.S.- Banjariya District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
X Daughter of ABC, Resident of village- Siswa Kachahariya Tola P SBanjariya Dist -East Champaran ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate Ms. Eashita Raj, Advocate Mr. Aditya Raj Singh, Advocate Ms. Ginni Priya, Advocate Ms. Nupur Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Pushpa Sinha.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Banjaria P.S. Case no.191 of 2025 registered under sections 75, 77, 78, 308(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, section 8 of the POCSO Act and section 67(A)(B) of the I.T. Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that the petitioner and four others because of prior enmity/dispute started troubling the 16 year old minor daughter
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9461 of 2026(8) dt.08-07-2026 2/3 of the informant and started threatening her that she should establish physical relations with him. Thereafter it is stated that he took some photographs, abused and threatened her that he would make objectionable videos. As a result of the action of the petitioner, the marriage of the daughter of the informant could not take place. Thereafter it is stated that the petitioner started to make a demand of Rs.5 lacs by way of rangdari.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case because of prior dispute between the parties which would be evident from the contents of the F.I.R. itself. There is an unexplained delay in lodging of the F.I.R. The parties are co-villagers. While the F.I.R. was registered on 29.3.2025, the statement under section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 of the informant's daughter was recorded much later on 12.12.2025 and the same was under the influence of her father. The allegations are categorically denied. The petitioner who has no criminal antecedent is in custody since 18.12.2025 and chargesheet has been submitted in the case.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State. Referring to the material that has transpired in course of investigation and especially the statement of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9461 of 2026(8) dt.08-07-2026 3/3 victim recorded under section 183 of the B.N.S.S., 2023, it is stated that the victim has categorically stated therein that the petitioner intoxicated her, established physical relations with her, made a video of the same and started threatening her. It is further stated that he had also taken away Rs.4.5 lacs from the house.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations in the F.I.R., the material that has transpired in course of investigation and especially the contents of the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 of the B.N.S.S., 2023, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
(Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T