Ajit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.60172 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-258 Year-2025 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== Ajit Kumar S/o- Akshay Lal R/o- Shiv Colony, Ps- Sasaram Town, DistRohtas, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Mithilesh Kumar Rai For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ram Sumiran Rai Mr.Dharmendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-09-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 75, 76, 79, 64, 316(2), 303(2), 351(2), 3(5)of the B.N.S.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that while she was returning home from school after teaching on 19.03.2025 at 3.10 P.M. when Ajit along with his brother Akash and Sudhir intercepted her and Ajit held her hand and asked to marry while Akash acted
2/4 inappropriately and Sudhir forcibly tried to make her seat on his motorcycle. Further, people came, accused fled and Ajit snatched her gold chain. Further, Ajit since 2019 is harassing her.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that informant is wife of the friend of the petitioner who died sometimes back. It is submitted that after the death of his friend, the petitioner by way of loan had given an amount Rs.4 Lacs to the informant which was credited in her account and when petitioner requested the informant to return the amount, an amount of Rs.30,000/- was returned, but thereafter the rest money was not being returned and the informant called him to her place where some accused from before were present, who brutally assaulted him. Accordingly, petitioner instituted Sasaram Town P. S. Case No.226 of 2025 dated 19.03.2025. It is further submitted that petitioner was referred to PMCH where he was treated.
It is next submitted that in the instant FIR though the informant alleges that date of occurrence is 19.03.2025, but then the FIR was instituted on 01.04.2025 i.e. after a delay of more than 12 days without any plausible explanation.
3/4 absolutely does not stand to reason that if the petitioner had asked the informant to marry then why his brother would have acted inappropriately with her. It is also submitted that allegation of snatching of chain is ornamental. It is reiterated and submitted that petitioner is a person with clean and is not criminal.
5. Learned A.P.P. as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the anticipatory bail application, but then, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that date of occurrence is 19.03.2025 and the FIR came to be instituted on 01.04.2025.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, 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 anticipatory bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sasaram at Rohtas in connection with Sasaram Town Model P. S. Case No.258 of 2025, subject to the
4/4 conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T