Niraj Pandey @ Niraj Kumar Pandey v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31469 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2019 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.
Niraj Pandey @ Niraj Kumar Pandey S/o Ravindra Pandey @ Rabindra Nath Pandey R/o- Vill-Telchha jhamsar, P.O.- Panditpur, P.s- Janta Bazar, Dist - Siwan 2.
Ravindra Pandey @ Rabindra Nath Pandey Son of Shri Kamal Deo Pandey R/o- Vill-Telchha jhamsar, P.O.- Panditpur, P.s- Janta Bazar, Dist - Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Umesh Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioners and Learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No.212 of 2019 under Sections 379, 420, 506, 504 and 120B of the IPC.
3. As per the prosecution, the complaint has been lodged against 7 accused persons including the petitioners with allegation that the complainant has provided his vehicle to the petitioners for 15 days, but inspite of effort, his vehicle has not been returned to him.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31469 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 2/3 petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. He submits that the entire allegation is false and only concocted and false story have been inserted in the FIR by the complainant. He further submits that the entire correspondence has been made either on mobile or on e-mail.
5. Counsel submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is clean. He further submits that the said vehicle has been seized as per paragraph 13 of the case diary. The Court of A.D.J. has acknowledged that paragraph 16, 17 and 18 of the case diary has supported the case of the prosecution.
6. Counsel further submits that the petitioner No.2 is old aged person about 61 years and he has been unnecessarily made accused in this case and there is no direct allegation against him.
7. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that report has been called for and it transpires that petitioner No.1 is on police bail as per paragraph 109 of the case diary, which is indicated in the report.
8. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of this case, considering the age of petitioner No.2 and no direct allegation against him, let the above named petitioner No.2, namely, Ravindra Pandey be released on anticipatory bail, in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31469 of 2025(3) dt.23-07-2025 3/3 event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 4 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan, in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No.212 of 2019, subject to the conditions as laid down U/s 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
9. So far as the petitioner No.1, namely, Niraj Pandey, is concerned, this Court finds that anticipatory bail for petitioner No.1 is not maintainable. As such, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner No.1, therefore the bail application of the petitioner No.1 is hereby rejected. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T