Patna High CourtCR. MISC./34080/2026bail rejected

Ratanjay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-05-18Mr. Justice Ritesh Kumar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34080 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-67 Year-2017 Thana- MEHANDIGANJ District- Patna ====================================================== Ratanjay Kumar S/o Nand Kishore @ Nand Kishor Kapad R/o Raghunathpur Karahi, P.S. - Sahebpur Kamal, Dist. - Begusarai, Bihar. At present - Deepnagar Road no. 4, Kaushal Jee Ke Makan, P.S. - Mehadiganj, Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Veena Devi W/o Harendra Singh, D/o Sachidanand Singh R/o Deep Nagar, Road No. 4, Kaushal Jee ka Makan, P.S. - Mehandiganj, Dist. - Patna. 3.

Harendra Singh H/o Veena Devi, S/o Nand Singh R/o Jaiber, P.S. - Gaurichak, Dist. - Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Umesh Lal Verma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-05-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mehandiganj P.S. Case No. 67 of 2017, for allegedly having committed offence under Sections 494, 498A and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution story, which has been lodged on the basis of the fardbeyan given by the informant before the Officer In-Charge, Mehandiganj Police Station to the effect that he got married in the year 2009, as per Hindu rights

2/4 and rituals and out of wedlock, she gave birth to a son, who is eight years old and she is six months pregnant. Fifteen days prior to the occurrence, her husband fled away from the house after taking away all the ornaments etc., who works as a teacher in Dhanakdoh Middle School, Ghoswari, Mokama. When the informant reached the school, she was informed that her husband is not coming to the school and he had also married another lady namely, Kanchan Kumari. On the basis of the aforesaid written report of the informant, the present case has been lodged.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has got no connection with the informant of the present case and she is married to one another person, namely, Harendra Singh. The present case has been lodged with some ulterior motive. He further submits that charge-sheet has been filed in the present case on 08.02.2019. The informant is a married lady, who after leaving her husband was residing in the tenanted house of Kaushal Kumar, where this petitioner was running a coaching centre and when the petitioner came to know about the Government job of the petitioner, she started extorting money from the petitioner by blackmailing him. He further submits that the petitioner is not the father of the children of the

3/4 informant and he is ready for DNA test. He submits that the present case has been lodged with ulterior motive and with mala fide intention, to extort money from the petitioner. The learned counsel further submits that from the entire order-sheet of the present case, which has been brought on record by way of Annexure-4 to bail petition, it would transpire that no cause of action arose for apprehension of arrest of the petitioner. Therefore, he did not file bail petition previously. He had approached this Hon'ble Court by filing anticipatory bail petition bearing Cr. Misc. No. 5496 of 2025, which was dismissed vide order dated 23.12.2025, on the ground that the petitioner had approached this Court after a delay of almost 7 and a half year. The petitioner has got a clean antecedent.

5. The learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has solemnized second marriage with another lady and his bail petition was earlier rejected by a Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 23.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5496 of 2025.

6. Having heard the rival submissions and after going through the record, it appears that the petitioner had approached this court by filing anticipatory bail vide Cr. Misc.

4/4 No. 5496 of 2025 and the same was rejected by a learned Coordinate Bench of this Court on 23.12.2025. Considering the above, the anticipatory bail petition of the petitioner is rejected. (Ritesh Kumar, J) AjayMishra/- U T