← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./22525/2026allowed

Ajeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-08Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar Pandey4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22525 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2025 Thana- LAUHIYANAGAR District- Begusarai ====================================================== Ajeet Kumar S/O Mantun Singh @ Ram Subhak Singh R/O VillageMaheshwara, PS- Manjahul, District- Begusarai, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Apurv Harsh, Advocate Mr. Raghav Raj, Advocate Mr. Himanshu Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 08-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Lohiyanagar P.S. Case no. 93 of 2025 instituted for the offence under Sections 140 (2), 61 (2), 103 (1), 238 and 3 (5) of the BNS, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the brother of the informant had gone to fetch vegetables along with Guddu Paswan and did not return for a considerable period of time. The informant called Guddu Paswan on his mobile phone and was informed that his brother had been kidnapped and a ransom of Rs. 5 lakh was being demanded. Guddu Paswan further

2/4 disclosed that Bhola Mahato had gone somewhere in a vehicle from Smot Point and had made a call asking the informant to come with Rs. 5 lakh. Subsequently, the dead body of the deceased was recovered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in connection with the present case. It is further submitted that the FIR was initially lodged against unknown miscreants and the case remained under investigation. During the course of investigation, the name of the petitioner transpired on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused Saurabh Kumar. Referring to the said confessional statement, learned counsel submits that it appears that the deceased had allegedly arranged Rs. 7 lakh, although Rs. 5 lakh had been demanded, but had informed the accused persons that he was not carrying the cash at that time. It is further alleged that thereafter, the petitioner, along with other co-accused persons, arrived in a car and assaulted the deceased.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that, from perusal of the post-mortem report, it transpires that the cause of death has been opined to be antemortem drowning. It is also submitted that the learned trial court

3/4 rejected the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner solely on the ground of criminal antecedents and recorded that the petitioner was involved in eight criminal cases. However, from perusal of the case diary, it appears that the eight criminal cases pertain to co-accused Ankith, whereas the petitioner has only two criminal antecedents.

6. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender in connection with Lohiyanagar P.S. Case no. 93 of 2025, he will be enlarged 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai/concerned Court, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C/ Section 482 (2) of the BNSS, subject to the condition that, at the time of furnishing bail bonds, the antecedents of the petitioner shall be duly verified by the learned trial court, particularly in light of his

4/4 disclosure that he has only two criminal antecedent (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Jagdish/- U T