Patna High Court
Vimala DeviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The High Court set aside the order rejecting anticipatory bail and allowed the appeals, granting anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
Ranjan Kumar Kamat was charged with kidnapping, kidnapping for marriage, and related offences under the IPC and the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. He applied for anticipatory bail, which was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge. Kamat appealed (Cr. Appeal SJ No.1731) and his mother and brother also appealed (Cr. Appeal SJ No.1748), contending that the notice was validly served and that they were falsely implicated. The Patna High Court examined the service of notice, the nature of the allegations, and the appellant's antecedent, and held that the lower court's order denying bail was erroneous. The Court set aside that order, allowed both appeals, and directed that the appellants be released on anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC.
- Whether the notice served by hanging on the house constitutes valid service.
- Whether the allegations under the IPC and SC/ST Act justify denial of bail.
- Whether the appellant was falsely implicated in the offences.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 34, 341, 363, 366A, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping
- marriage
- SC/ST Act
- bail
- Criminal Procedure Code
- false implication
- service of notice
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1731 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2024 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani
======================================================
Ranjan Kumar Kamat S/o Raghunath Kamat R/o Village- Donwari, P.O.-
Kumarkhat, P.S.- Ladaniya, District- Madhubani
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pramila Devi W/o Arun Kumar Ram R/o vill - Donwari, P.O. - Kumarkhat,
P.S.- Ladaniya, Distt.- Madhubani
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1748 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2024 Thana- LADANIA District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Vimala Devi W/o- Raghunath Kamat Village- Donwari P.S. Ladaniya
District-Madhubani
2. Pankaj Kumar Kamat S/o- Raghunath Kamat Village- Donwari P.S.
Ladaniya District-Madhubani
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pramila Devi w/o- Arun Kumar Ram Village- Donwari P.S. Ladaniya
District-Madhubani
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1731 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ashad
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1748 of 2025)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Md Soban Asghar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
5 29-01-2026 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1731 of 2025
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
APP for the State.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1731 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
2/6
2. The appellant has challenged the order dated
13.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-
cum- Special Judge, SC/ST, Madhubani in connection with ABP
No.265 of 2025 arising out of Ladaniya P. S. Case No.122 of
2024, G.R. No.62 of 2024, instituted for the offences under
Sections 363, 366(A), 323, 341, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s),3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes &
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby his
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that
from perusal of the office report dated 18.09.2025, it would
manifest that the same records:- “a service report kept on record
has been received with report of the process server that due to
some work respondent no.2 does not meet at her given address
and when she will return not known hence notice hung on the
door of east side of the house of respondent no.2.
4. Since the notice has been hung on the house of the
respondent no.2, hence it is deemed to be validly served.
5. The learned counsel for the appellant next submits
that appellant has antecedent of one case and the informant
alleges that on 28.04.2024, when she woke up, she found her
minor daughter aged about 17 years missing. On search, it
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1731 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
3/6
transpired that Ranjan enticed her for the purposes of marriage.
Accordingly, on coming to know about the said fact, the
informant along with others went to the house of Ranjan when
his mother (Vimla Devi), father Raghunath Kamat and uncle
started abusing them and said to do whatever they feel like.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that
appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant being parents and brother of Ranjan. It is also
submitted that victim has come back and her statement was
recorded under Section 183 BNSS wherein she has disclosed
her age as 18 years and has not supported the case of
prosecution rather has stated that she on her own volition left
her parental house and went with the appellant and they
performed marriage in a temple.
7. The learned Special P. P. opposes the bail
application.
8. Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the
order dated 13.02.2025 is set-aside.
9. The appeal stands allowed.
10. The appellant, 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 bail on his
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1731 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
4/6
furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-
Special Judge, SC/ST, Madhubani in connection with ABP
No.265 of 2025 arising out of Ladaniya P. S. Case No.122 of
2024, G.R. No.62 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1748 of 2025
Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The appellants have challenged the order dated
13.02.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-
cum- Special Judge, SC/ST, Madhubani in connection with ABP
No.2458 of 2024 arising out of Ladaniya P. S. Case No.122 of
2024, G.R. No.62 of 2024, instituted for the offences under
Sections 363, 366(A), 323, 341, 504, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal
Code and Sections 3(1)(r)(s),3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes &
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act of the
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, 1989, whereby their prayer for grant of anticipatory bail
has been rejected.
3. The learned counsel for the appellants next submits
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1731 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
5/6
that appellants have antecedent of one case and the informant
alleges that on 28.04.2024, when she woke up, she found her
minor daughter aged about 17 years missing. On search, it
transpired that Ranjan enticed her for the purposes of marriage.
Accordingly, on coming to know about the said fact, the
informant along with others went to the house of Ranjan when
his mother (Vimla Devi), father Raghunath Kamat and uncle
started abusing them and said to do whatever they feel like.
4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that
appellant being mother of Ranjan has been falsely implicated in
the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that
Ranjan Kumar Kamat had approached this Court seeking
anticipatory bail application by filing Cr. Appeal (SJ) No.1731
of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated
29.01.2026.
5. The learned Special P. P. opposes the bail
application.
6. Considering the submissions and taking into
consideration the order dated 29.01.2026 in Cr. Appeal (S.J.)
No.1731 of 2025, the appellants, above-named, in the event of
their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a
period of eight weeks, are directed to be released on bail on
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1731 of 2025(5) dt.29-01-2026
6/6
their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to
the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-
Special Judge, SC/ST, Madhubani in connection with ABP
No.265 of 2025 arising out of Ladaniya P. S. Case No.122 of
2024, G.R. No.62 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
7. The appeal is allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…