Patna High Court
Raja @ Ranjit PatelversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court held that, in the absence of any incriminating material and given the nature of the allegations, anticipatory bail may be granted under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Raja Ranjit Patel, was implicated in two FIRs alleging theft of a motorcycle (registration BR‑22AG 6310) under Section 379 of the IPC. He contended that the FIRs were filed to settle a monetary dispute arising from a wedding catering contract where he was underpaid. No incriminating material was recovered from his possession or residence, and he was already on bail for a prior case. The State opposed his request for anticipatory bail. Considering the nature of the allegations, the lack of seized evidence, and the petitioner’s antecedent bail status, the High Court granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The order directed the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties and comply with specific conditions regarding court appearances, non‑tampering with witnesses, and refraining from further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the allegations under Section 379 IPC and the existence of two FIRs for the same incident.
- Whether the absence of recovered incriminating material and the petitioner’s antecedent bail status justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 379
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- theft
- motorcycle
- IPC 379
- Section 482 CrPC
- high court order
- money dispute
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23733 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1078 Year-2022 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran
======================================================
Raja @ Ranjit Patel S/o Ram Raj Patel @ Ramraj Prasad Resident of Village-
Tikulia Bhaza Tola, Ward No 12, Police Station- Paharpur, District- East
Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Shakil Ahmad Khan, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Murli Dhar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Bettiah Mufassil P.S. Case No. 1078 of 2022
for the offence punishable under sections 379 of IPC lodged on
19.12.2022 by the informant.
3. As per the prosecution case, the motorcycle
bearing Registration No. BR-22AG 6310 of the informant was
stolen which was parked in front of the house of one Naimuddin
Quraishi at Pipra Chowk, for which this petitioner is alleged to
be instrumental. Accordingly, the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on
allegation of theft of motorcycle being registration no. BR-
22AG 6310, two First Information Reports have been lodged by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23733 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/3
the informant. In the present FIR, the petitioner is seeking
anticipatory bail while the second FIR being Bettiah Mufassil
PS Case No.1094 of 2022 dated 26.12.2022 has been lodged
against unknown. It has next been submitted that no recovery of
any incriminating materials has been made from the
constructive possession of the petitioner or from his house and
he has got no connection with the theft of any motorcycle as
alleged. It is the case of the petitioner that he being the
confectioner prepared sweets of Rs. 12,000/- for the wedding of
the informant’s daughter and when he demanded his money, he
was paid only Rs. 4000/- through online mode and the
informant further refused to pay the outstanding amount of Rs.
8000/-. Hence, with an ulterior motive and in order to settle the
money dispute the FIRs have been lodged. Learned counsel for
the petitioner fairly submits that the petitioner has got one
antecedent in which he is on bail
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for anticipatory
bail.
6. Considering the nature of allegation and two FIRs have
been registered for the same occurrence, no recovery of any
incriminating materials has been made from the constructive
possession of the petitioner or from his house, this Court is inclined
to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23733 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
3/3
7. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on
bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six
weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of
Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
West Champaran, Bettiah in connection with aforesaid PS
Case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS as well as the following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the
family member/relative of the petitioner(s)
who shall provide official document to show
his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear
on each and every date before the Trial
Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason
will entail cancellation of his/their bail
bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no
way try to induce or promise or threat the
witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to
take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist
from committing any criminal offence again,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to
take steps for cancellation of his/their bail
bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
perwez
U
Checking your session…