Patna High Court
Ajay Sah @ Ajay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Sah, sought anticipatory bail in connection with a kidnapping case (PS Alamnagar Case No. 154 of 2025) where the FIR was lodged four days after the alleged incident. He argued that the delay in filing the FIR and the absence of any material linking him to the crime, as well as the victim’s continued disappearance, made the allegations speculative. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the kidnapping charge and the fact that the victim remained untraced. The Court considered the delay, the lack of concrete evidence against the petitioner, his clean antecedents, and his undertaking to cooperate with the investigation. Accordingly, the Court granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond, sureties, and conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite the delay in filing the FIR and the serious nature of the kidnapping allegations.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedents and willingness to cooperate justify bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping
- FIR delay
- Section 482
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66930 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-154 Year-2025 Thana- ALAMNAGAR District- Madhepura
======================================================
Ajay Sah @ Ajay Kumar Son of Sulo Sah @ Surendra Sah Resident of
Village - Bagraha, Ward no. 5, P.S. - Alamnagar, District - Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, Adv.
Mr. Manoj Kumar, Adv.
Ms. Pooja Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satyendra Narain Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard Ms. Pooja Prasad, learned Advocate for the
petitioner and Mr. Satyendra Narain Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Alamnagar P.S. Case No. 154 of 2025, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 137(2), 140(3), 96, 3(5) of
the BNS.
3. Allegedly, in the morning of the fateful day, while
the informant’s daughter was going for tuition, in the
meanwhile, all the FIR named accused persons, including the
petitioner along with three unknown persons came on a four-
wheeler vehicle. All the accused persons forcibly kidnapped her
and got her seated on the said vehicle on the point of pistol and
manged to flee away. During the course of search, the informant
came to know that after kidnapping, his daughter was kept in the
house of this petitioner and thereafter she was taken away on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66930 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
different places.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner referring to the
FIR contended that surprisingly the alleged occurrence took
place on 08.05.2025 but the FIR came to be instituted on
12.05.2025. Had the informant known this fact that his daughter
was kidnapped by the nine named accused persons and three
unknown persons, he would have certainly lodged the FIR
immediately after occurrence on 08.05.2025 itself but the same
has not been done. The petitioner is also the resident of the same
place and, as such, if the victim girl was kidnapped and kept in
his house, the neighbours or the informant should have informed
to the police but this has also not been done. In fact, on account
of suspicion, the name of the petitioner has been implicated in
this case by making some specific accusation of keeping the girl
in his house. During the course of investigation, no cogent
material has come which suggests the aforesaid facts and the
investigation regarding complicity of the petitioner is still going
on. The petitioner undertakes that he will fully cooperate in the
investigation and the proceeding of the court as the whereabouts
of the victim could not be traced out.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66930 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
apart from the specific accusation of kidnapping, the victim girl
is still traceless and, as such, the petitioner does not deserve the
privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by
the learned Advocates for the respective parties and taking note
of the delay in institution of the FIR, coupled with the omnibus
allegation of kidnapping, besides the fair antecedent of the
petitioner and his undertaking that he will cooperate in the
investigation, let the petitioner abovenamed be released on bail,
in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below
within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Uda Kishunganj, Madhepura in
connection with Alamnagar P.S. Case No. 154 of 2025, subject
to the conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya
Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the further condition that
one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the
petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
Anjani/-
U T
Checking your session…