Vijay Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81789 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-306 Year-2025 Thana- AKHODHIGOLA District- Rohtas ====================================================== Vijay Singh S/o Late Kedar Singh Resident of Chandi, P.S.- Akhorigola, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Mala Devi W/O- Binod Kumar Singh, at present Tara Nagar, ps-nchas, dist. bokaro, ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Md Fazle Karim, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, A.P.P.

For the Informant :

Mr. Ravi Rohit, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and the State.

2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. Informant alleges that her two tractors were kept at village under the care of this petitioner, who is her cousin brotherin-law and when informant returned, she found that the tractors were missing. It is alleged that in connivance with other accused persons, this petitioner created forged agreement with the signature of informant and sold her tractors. This petitioner is also alleged to have assaulted the husband of informant and threatened him with dire consequences.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81789 of 2025(5) dt.13-03-2026 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. As a matter of fact, as per partition agreement, tractors in question belonged to the petitioner and EMIs of the same were paid by the petitioner in the account of informant. F.I.R. has been lodged after inordinate delay of eight years, without any plausible explanation, which itself raises doubt over veracity of the prosecution case. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. Considering backdrop of the case, delay in lodging the F.I.R. and clean antecedent, this anticipatory bail is allowed and it is ordered that let the above named petitioner in the event of his arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Akhorigola P. S. Case No. 306 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) BNSS. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T