Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Chaudhary @ Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55871 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2023 Thana- SHEIKHOPUR SARAI DistrictSheikhpura ====================================================== Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjit Chaudhary @ Ranjeet Kumar @ Ranjeet Chaudhary Son of Naresh Choudhary @ Naresh Chaudhary Village -Miyanbigha at Bara Bigha, P.s.- Sheikhopursarai, District-Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Rakesh Chaudhary Son of Genauri Chaudhary Village -Miyanbigha, P.s.- Sheikhopursarai, District-Sheikhpura ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vijay Anand, Advocate Mr. Roop Kishan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 22-12-2025 Heard Mr. Vijay Anand, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 16.10.2024 in connection with Sheikhopursarai P.S. Case No. 233 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 12.12.2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 366A and 34 of the IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act.
3. Earlier the regular bail application of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 10.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 837520 of 2024.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55871 of 2025(4) dt.22-12-2025 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that at the time of occurrence the victim was minor and her statement was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C./183 of the BNNS in which she has categorically stated that she is living with the petitioner in Gujarat as husband and wife and apart from that her statement was recorded in the trial stating therein that she has performed marriage with the petitioner and after her marriage, her father forcefully performed her marriage with one Morpal.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioner has clean antecedent and the victim has stated that she has performed marriage with the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge, VI, Sheikhpura in connection with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55871 of 2025(4) dt.22-12-2025 3/3 Sheikhopursarai P.S. Case No. 233 of 2023, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T