Ajay Thakur @ Ajay Kumar Thakur v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32860 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-230 Year-2023 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Ajay Thakur @ Ajay Kumar Thakur S/o- Late Parmanand Thakur Resident of at present 137 Police Colony Anisabad PS- Anisabad, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Manoj Kumar- Advocate Mr. Raj Narayan Mishra- Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta- A.P.P.
Mr. Bijendra Kumar Singh- Advocate Mr. Kumar Dhananjay Singh- Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 13-08-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned APP for the State, Mr. Parmeshwar Mehta and the learned Advocate Mr. Kumar Dhananjay Singh.
2. On query of the Court from learned Advocate Mr. Kumar Dhananjay Singh that as to whether he is representing the informant, the learned Advocate submitted that he is not representing the informant rather is representing the person on whose complaint, the instant FIR came to be instituted, as such, it gives an impression to the Court that the complainant is pursuing the petitioner for some ulterior reason.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant, who is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32860 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 2/3 Executive Officer of the Nagar Panchayat, Jagdishpur, alleges that accused persons including the petitioner misappropriated public money to the tune of Rs.23,66,000/- entrusted to them for consideration of RCC Drain and PCC road.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from bare perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the same is cryptic and vague. It is also submitted that petitioner has retired as Junior Engineer. It is next submitted that the informant instead of instituting the instant FIR could have proceeded against the petitioner under the Pension Rules, but then, instead of proceeding against the petitioner under the Pension Rules, the instant FIR came to be instituted. It is also submitted that had an opportunity been given to the petitioner seeking his explanation prior to instituting the FIR, in that event, the instant FIR would not have been instituted. It is next submitted that complainant on whose behest the instant FIR has been instituted is in habit of instituting FIR with frivolous allegation, earlier also the complainant had instituted an FIR against the petitioner. It is also submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
5. Considering the submissions made by the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32860 of 2025(3) dt.13-08-2025 3/3 counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM 1st, Bhojpur at Ara in connection with Jagdishpur P. S. Case No.230 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
6. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T