Anuj Kumar Singh @ Chotan Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55644 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-120 Year-2024 Thana- AYARKOTHA District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
Anuj Kumar Singh @ Chotan Singh, aged about 37 years, Gender, Male, son of Late Baban Singh 2.
Alok Kumar @ Alok Kumar Singh @ Chhotu Singh, aged about 32 years, Gender, Male, son of Late Baban Singh 3.
Ajay Kumar, aged about 25 years, Gender, Male, son of Anil Singh All are resident of Village -Darihat PS -Darihat Distt -Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Arun Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-09-2025 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Ayarkotha P.S. Case No. 120 of 2024 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 127(1),115(2),329(4),351,352(2),74,75,76,3(5), of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the petitioners with a common intention to kill and outrage the modesty of the informant had entered into the house and assaulted her.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55644 of 2025(2) dt.08-09-2025 2/3
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case due to land dispute. He further submitted that in fact the informant and her family members have unauthorizedly grabbed the land situated in front of the land of the petitioners and had made illegal construction and petitioners side find it difficult to go to their land. The petitioners requested them to remove the illegal construction made thereupon but they did not remove the same and at the same time, they have implicated the petitioners in a false case. Petitioners have clean antecedents.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, having considered the nature of allegation made against the petitioners and also the fact that there is land dispute between the parties, I am of the opinion that petitioners, who are having clean antecedents, have, prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioners, above named, are directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55644 of 2025(2) dt.08-09-2025 3/3 four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Civil Court, Dehri, Rohtas in connection with Ayarkotha P.S. Case No. 120 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that the petitioners are involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will automatically lose its force.
(Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T