Shashi Pandit @ Ashish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49586 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2026 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai ====================================================== Shashi Pandit @ Ashish Kumar son of Bal Krishna Pandit Resident of villagePipra Dih, Jhajha, Ps- Jhajha District- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-07-2026 Heard Mr. Amarendar Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Narendra Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. This application for anticipatory bail arises out of Balia P.S. Case No. 63 of 2026 registered for the offence under sections 354(A), 341, 384, 509, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 28.01.2026, before the marriage of the informant, her brotherin-law (petitioner), allegedly took her photo in objectionable condition and started blackmailing her. She further alleged that her parents fixed her marriage but due to petitioner, her relation was broken. It is also alleged that even after marriage of the informant, the petitioner still used to threaten and harass the informant in order to pursue her to continue old relationship with the informant. When the informant stopped talking to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49586 of 2026(2) dt.22-07-2026 2/2 petitioner who happens to be the brother-in-law then again the petitioner sent messages through one Niraj Kumar to her husband due to which her husband became mentally disturbed.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner happens to be the brother-in-law of the informant, has falsely been implicated in this case under a misconception.

5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer of anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner, who happens to be the brother-in-law of the informant.

6. Having heard the parties and considering the fact that the allegation alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is rejected.

8. However, if the petitioner surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order. (Alok Kumar, J) khushbu/- U T