Rajendra Gupta @ Rajendra Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51094 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2025 Thana- MAIRWAN District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.
Rajendra Gupta @ Rajendra Sah S/o Jaleshwar Gupta R/o Village - Aatwa, P.S - Mairwa, District - Siwan 2.
Ranjan Gupta @ Ranjan Kumar @ Ranjan Kumar Gupta S/o Rajendra Gupta @ Rajendra Sah R/o village - Aatwa, P.S - Mairwa, District - Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pranav Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-11-2025 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 140(3), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per the FIR, the informant has alleged that her husband was taken to Rohtak for employment by the petitioners, after which he went missing. The informant attempted to contact him but was unsuccessful. She was informed by a labour contractor in Rohtak that a quarrel had taken place and that her husband could not be traced thereafter. When the petitioners returned, they denied having any knowledge of his whereabouts.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51094 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 2/3 this case. He further submits that, as per the FIR, it does not appear that the petitioners were in any way involved in the disappearance of the informant's husband, who is said to have gone missing from the place where they, along with the informant's husband had gone to Rohtak for labour work. It is next submitted that merely because the petitioners could not establish contact with the informant's husband over the telephone, their names have been roped into this case. He further submits that the allegations against the petitioners are general and omnibus in nature, and there is nothing specific to indicate their involvement in the incident in question. The references to the paragraphs of the case diary in the impugned order only reflect the efforts made by the prosecution to trace the missing person. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents.
5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Taking into account that there is no specific allegation against the petitioners, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51094 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 3/3 (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM-V, Siwan/Successor Court in connection with Mairwa P.S. Case No.168 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS as well as the following conditions: (i) One of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself; (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) shikha/- U T