Patna High CourtCR. APP (SJ)/1731/2025allowed

Ranjan Kumar Kamat v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-29Mr. Justice Satyavrat Verma6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1731 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2024 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani ====================================================== Ranjan Kumar Kamat S/o Raghunath Kamat R/o Village- Donwari, P.O.- Kumarkhat, P.S.- Ladaniya, District- Madhubani ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Pramila Devi W/o Arun Kumar Ram R/o vill - Donwari, P.O. - Kumarkhat, P.S.- Ladaniya, Distt.- Madhubani ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1748 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2024 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

Vimala Devi W/o- Raghunath Kamat Village- Donwari P.S. Ladaniya District-Madhubani 2.

Pankaj Kumar Kamat S/o- Raghunath Kamat Village- Donwari P.S. Ladaniya District-Madhubani ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar 2.

Pramila Devi w/o- Arun Kumar Ram Village- Donwari P.S. Ladaniya District-Madhubani ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1731 of 2025) For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Ashad For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Sadanand Paswan (In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1748 of 2025) For the Appellant/s :

Mr.Md Soban Asghar For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Sadanand Paswan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-01-2026 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1731 of 2025 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned APP for the State.

2/6

2. The appellant has challenged the order dated 13.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1cum- Special Judge, SC/ST, Madhubani in connection with ABP 2024, G.R. No.62 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 363, 366(A), 323, 341, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s),3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.

3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that from perusal of the office report dated 18.09.2025, it would manifest that the same records:- "a service report kept on record has been received with report of the process server that due to some work respondent no.2 does not meet at her given address and when she will return not known hence notice hung on the door of east side of the house of respondent no.2.

4. Since the notice has been hung on the house of the respondent no.2, hence it is deemed to be validly served.

5. The learned counsel for the appellant next submits that appellant has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that on 28.04.2024, when she woke up, she found her minor daughter aged about 17 years missing. On search, it

3/6 transpired that Ranjan enticed her for the purposes of marriage. Accordingly, on coming to know about the said fact, the informant along with others went to the house of Ranjan when his mother (Vimla Devi), father Raghunath Kamat and uncle started abusing them and said to do whatever they feel like.

6. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant being parents and brother of Ranjan. It is also submitted that victim has come back and her statement was recorded under Section 183 BNSS wherein she has disclosed her age as 18 years and has not supported the case of prosecution rather has stated that she on her own volition left her parental house and went with the appellant and they performed marriage in a temple.

7. The learned Special P. P. opposes the bail application.

8. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the order dated 13.02.2025 is set-aside.

9. The appeal stands allowed.

10. The appellant, 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 bail on his

4/6 furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cumSpecial Judge, SC/ST, Madhubani in connection with ABP 2024, G.R. No.62 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1748 of 2025 Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The appellants have challenged the order dated 13.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1cum- Special Judge, SC/ST, Madhubani in connection with ABP No.2458 of 2024 arising out of Ladaniya P. S. Case No.122 of 2024, G.R. No.62 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 363, 366(A), 323, 341, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s),3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, whereby their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants next submits

5/6 that appellants have antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that on 28.04.2024, when she woke up, she found her minor daughter aged about 17 years missing. On search, it transpired that Ranjan enticed her for the purposes of marriage. Accordingly, on coming to know about the said fact, the informant along with others went to the house of Ranjan when his mother (Vimla Devi), father Raghunath Kamat and uncle started abusing them and said to do whatever they feel like.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that appellant being mother of Ranjan has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that Ranjan Kumar Kamat had approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail application by filing Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1731 of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 29.01.2026.

5. The learned Special P. P. opposes the bail application.

6. Considering the submissions and taking into consideration the order dated 29.01.2026 in Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.1731 of 2025, the appellants, above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of eight weeks, are directed to be released on bail on

6/6 their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cumSpecial Judge, SC/ST, Madhubani in connection with ABP 2024, G.R. No.62 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

7. The appeal is allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T