Patna High Court
Sivbalak Ram @ Shivbalak RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail as the allegations of extortion and kidnapping are not substantiated by the victim’s statement.
Summary
Ganesh Kumar Chaudhary was arrested in connection with a case alleging he forced the mother of an informant to travel to Calcutta, extorted Rs.50,000 and kidnapped her. The petitioner contended that the victim voluntarily went to Calcutta and that there was no evidence of extortion or kidnapping, citing her statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. which denied any physical or sexual assault. The State opposed bail, but the court found the FIR allegations unsupported by the victim’s statement and held that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the court directed the district court to release the petitioner on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to verification of his criminal antecedent and compliance with Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order also stipulated that the bail would lapse automatically if any other pending case against the petitioner is discovered.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory (pre‑arrest) bail despite allegations of extortion and kidnapping.
- Whether the victim’s statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. negates the materiality of the charges under Sections 137(2), 87, 84 and 3 of the BNS.
- Whether conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- pre‑arrest bail
- extortion
- kidnapping
- Section 164 CrPC
- criminal antecedent
- bail bond
- sureties
- Section 482(2) BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10483 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1105 Year-2024 Thana- PHULWARISHARIF District- Patna
======================================================
Ganesh Kumar Chaudhary @ Ganesh Kumar S/O Nand Chaudhary Resident
Of Mohalla - Karbala Road,Near Guddu General Store, P.S- Phulwari Sharif,
District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Saurav Kumar Suman, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 13-05-2025 Heard Mr. Saurav Kumar Suman, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Shyam Kumar
Singh, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Phulwari Sharif (Janipur) P.S. Case No. 1105 of 2024
registered under Sections 137(2), 87, 84, 3 of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the petitioner
allegedly forced the informant’s (Sushma Kumari) mother
namely Sita Devi to go to Calcutta at the place of co-accused
Rakibul Shek and Raja Kumar and they took Rs.50,000/- from
her (informant’s mother) and allegedly kidnapped her.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10483 of 2025(3) dt.13-05-2025
2/3
role in the alleged kidnapping rather the victim (mother of the
informant) at her own will went to Calcutta. The allegation
against the petitioner that he has extorted Rs.50,000/- is not well
substantiated. In the statement recorded under the Section 164
of the Cr.P.C., the victim has stated that no physical or sexual
assault has been caused to her and the only allegation she has
made is that the petitioner had forced her for going to Calcutta,
therefore, the question of extortion and kidnapping don’t arise.
The petitioner has clean antecedent. On these grounds, the
petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State referring to the statement
of victim recorded under the Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Considering the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, the allegation made in the FIR, I find
that the same is not supported by the statement recorded under
the Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., wherein, the victim has stated
that no physical or sexual assault has been caused to her and the
only allegation she has made is that the petitioner has forced her
for going to Calcutta, therefore, the question of extortion and
kidnapping don’t arise, I am of the opinion that the petitioner
has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on anticipatory
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10483 of 2025(3) dt.13-05-2025
3/3
bail.
7. The learned District Court is directed to release the
petitioner on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the
satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate XIV,
Patna in connection with Phulwari Sharif (Janipur) P.S. Case
No. 1105 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under
Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner, as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…