Patna High Court
Ajay Sah @ Ajay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
The court held that, given the lack of specific charges, the petitioners' clean antecedent and the apparent motive of a false complaint, anticipatory bail under Section 482 is warranted.
Summary
The petitioners, four residents of Basahiya village, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under multiple sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and the POCSO Act. The informant, who is the daughter‑in‑law of petitioner No. 4, alleged that on 7 October 2025 the accused entered her house, assaulted her, attempted to misbehave with her daughter, and stole jewellery worth Rs 20,000. The petitioners contended that the informant is a close relative and that the complaint is false, arising from a land‑ownership dispute, and that there are no specific allegations against them. They also highlighted their clean antecedent. The court considered the familial relationship, the general and omnibus nature of the allegations, and the petitioners’ clean record, and consequently granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether the general and omnibus allegations against the petitioners justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Whether the familial relationship and alleged motive of a false case affect the grant of bail.
- Whether Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, can be invoked to grant anticipatory bail in this circumstance.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 351(3), 352, 74
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 12, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false complaint
- land dispute
- POCSO Act
- criminal procedure
- clean antecedent
- Section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6912 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAHI District- Sheohar
======================================================
1. Ajay Sah @ Ajay Kumar son of Late Madan Sah Resident of village -
Basahiya, Shek, Ward No. 03, P.S - Piprahi, District - Sheohar
2. Manish Sah @ Manish Kumar Son of Ajay Sah Resident of village -
Basahiya, Shek, Ward No. 03, P.S - Piprahi, District - Sheohar
3. Bachhi Devi @ Bachhiya Devi Wife of Late Madan Sah Resident of village
- Basahiya, Shek, Ward No. 03, P.S - Piprahi, District - Sheohar
4. Hulash Rawat son of Late Jaipal Rawat @ Japal Raut Resident of village
-Basatiya Shekh, P.S - Piprahi, District - Sheohar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X W/O- Z Resident of village -Piprahi, P.S - Piprahi, District - Sheohar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Devendra Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Indiwar Kumari
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
5 30-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offence under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109,
74, 352, 351(3) read with section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya
Sanhita and sections 8, 12 of POCSO Act.
3. Informant alleged that on 07.10.2025, all named
accused persons including these petitioners along with 6-7
unknown persons came to her house and started throwing
house-hold articles. She further alleged that other co-accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6912 of 2026(5) dt.30-06-2026
2/3
persons assaulted her, caught her daughter and tried to
misbehave with her also torn her clothes. The accused persons
also took away jewellery worth Rs. 20,000/-.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
informant is none else but own cousin daughter-in-law of
petitioner no. 4. As a matter of fact, petitioner no. 4 is issueless
and had purchased 2 ½ decimal of land from one Ramkrishan
Tiwary in his sasural and on that land, petitioners had
constructed a house and were living there and husband of
informant, who is own nephew of petitioner no. 4, did not want
to vacate the purchased land house and due to that reason, this
false and concocted case has been lodged. There is no specific
allegation against these petitioners, rather there is general &
omnibus allegation. Rest of the allegation is only ornamental in
order to make the case grave. Petitioners claim clean
antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the informant/OP-2
vehemently opposed the bail petition.
6. Considering the backdrop of the case, relation
between the parties, general & omnibus allegation and clean
antecedent, the anticipatory bail petition is allowed.
Accordingly, let the above named petitioners, in the event of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6912 of 2026(5) dt.30-06-2026
3/3
their arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today,
be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten
thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Exclusive Special Judge, POCSO,
Sheohar in connection with Piprahi P.S. Case No. 201 of 2025,
subject to condition as laid down under Section 482 of the
Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
anay
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.