Patna High Court
Ajit Kumar Ram @ Ajit RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The Court refused the petitioner's anticipatory bail, holding that the nature of the accusation and the victim's statement under Section 183 BNSS warrant denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajit Kumar Ram, sought anticipatory bail in a kidnapping case (PS Case No. 168 of 2025) where the informant alleged his minor daughter was abducted on 25.05.2025 by the petitioner and co‑accused. The informant claimed the kidnapping was linked to a land dispute and that the victim, after being recovered, gave a statement under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita supporting the prosecution. The petitioner contended he was falsely implicated, maintained a clean antecedent, and denied any involvement. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the victim's recorded statement and the seriousness of the offences under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the BNSS. The Court, after considering the nature of the accusation and the victim’s statement, refused the anticipatory bail application. Consequently, the petitioner remains liable to arrest under the pending FIR.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita?
- Does the victim's statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS substantiate the prosecution's case sufficient to deny bail?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 137(2), 183, 96
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 183 statement
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4548 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2025 Thana- LALIT NARAYAN UNIVERSITY
District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Ajit Kumar Ram @ Ajit Ram S/o Rajendra Ram R/o - Nauagadhi,
Nawagadhi, Bela, Ward No.03, P.S - L.N.M.U, District - Darbhanga, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinay Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
For the Informant : Mr. Rajeev Ranjan No. II, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 06-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant
and the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends arrest in L.N.M.U. P. S. Case
No. 168 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 137(2), 96 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per F.I.R., informant alleges that on 25.05.2025,
minor daughter of the informant went missing. Informant
alleges that this petitioner along with other named accused
persons kidnapped her.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner
has falsely been implicated in this case due to admitted land
dispute between the parties. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4548 of 2026(3) dt.06-04-2026
2/2
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned
counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail
application and submitted that during investigation, victim was
recovered and in her statement recorded under Section 183
BNSS, she has supported the prosecution case and has stated
that this petitioner along with co-accused Suman Ram took her
on motorcycle and later on, they took her to Rajasthan.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and statement
of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner is refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…