Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23384/2025bail rejected

Ajit Kumar @ Raja Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-23Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23384 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-420 Year-2024 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada ====================================================== Ajit Kumar @ Raja Kumar S/O Ram Udgar Prasad Yadav Resident of Ramdev, Ramdewa, P.S- Rajauli, Distt.- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pramod Kumar Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No. 420 of 2024 instituted under Sections 309(4) of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 lodged on 29.08.2024 by the informant, Biraju Kumar.

3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that he was in the business of transporting the goods by his vehicle and on the alleged date, after providing an advance of Rs.500/-, was booked, as he reached the place, on the point of gun, the accused forcibly got transferred thorough UPI Rs.17,600/- and Rs.2300/- besides snatching gold chain as also the mobile phone this led to the FIR.

4. Subsequently, the Police investigated the matter and reached the door of the petitioner on the basis of confession

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23384 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 2/2 of Sujit Kumar.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no role to play in the matter and only because of confession, the name has cropped up.

6. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that the investigation clearly has taken note of the said confession and the role of of the petitioner in the present case.

7. Considering the submissions of the parties as also the disturbing facts that a poor person was deprived of his amount through UPI besides snatching of the mobile/gold chain, it would be appropriate that the petitioner seek bail.

8. The anticipatory bail application stands rejected. (Rajiv Roy, J) Ravi/- U T