Patna High Court
Ajay Ray @ Ajay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The application for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Ray, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS Case No.271 of 2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 310(2) and 111(2) of the B.N.S., where a looted tempo was said to have been recovered from him. He claimed to be an innocent bonafide purchaser of the tempo but could not produce purchase details, while asserting a clean antecedent. The State opposed the anticipatory bail, arguing the allegations warranted arrest. The Court held that the circumstances were not suitable for granting anticipatory bail and dismissed the application. The petitioner was ordered to surrender within two weeks and apply for regular bail, failing which the police would be directed to arrest him.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail in view of the allegations of theft and possession of a looted tempo
- Whether the lack of purchase documentation and the nature of the offences preclude anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 111(2), 310(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- theft
- looted vehicle
- bail application
- clean antecedent
- purchase claim
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5707 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-271 Year-2025 Thana- SALIMPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Ajay Ray @ Ajay Kumar Son of Prasiddh Ray R/o Village - Daudnagar, P.S. -
Bidupur, Dist. - Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in
connection with Salimpur P.S. Case No. 271 of 2025 registered
for the offence under Sections 310(2), 111(2) of B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, a looted tempo has
been recovered from the petitioner.
4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for
the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely
been implicated in this case. The petitioner claims to be the
bonafide purchaser of the said tempo but the learned counsel is
unable to give the details of purchase. Petitioner has clean
antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5707 of 2026(3) dt.24-02-2026
2/2
for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the allegations levelled against the
petitioner, this is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.
7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
8. The petitioner is directed to surrender within two
weeks from today and pray for regular bail, failing which the
Superintendent of Police, Patna will take all steps for arrest of
the petitioner.
9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Superintendent of Police, Patna through FAX or e-mail for its
compliance.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
Checking your session…