Patna High Court
Ajeet Kumar @ Ajeet Thakur @ Ajit Thakur @ Ajit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court allowed the petition for anticipatory bail, granting it with conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Ajeet Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2025) involving multiple offences under the B.N.S. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with others, assaulted the informant, used a lathi, danda and an iron rod, and snatched her gold chain. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated due to a pre‑existing family dispute, that the FIR contained only generic allegations without specifying his role, and that he has a clean antecedent. The State opposed the bail. The High Court, after considering the submissions and the lack of specific incriminating material against the petitioner, granted anticipatory bail subject to conditions under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the B.N.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC read with Section 482 of the B.N.S. in view of the allegations and lack of specific role attribution
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and clean antecedent warrants bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.
- false implication
- family dispute
- assault
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 82107 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-248 Year-2025 Thana- SAHEBGANJ District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Ajeet Kumar @ Ajeet Thakur @ Ajit Thakur @ Ajit Kumar Son of Late
Rajendra Thakur. R/o Village - Parsauni Rais, P.S. - Sahabganj, Dist. -
Muaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nachiketa Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Madhuri Lata, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with
Sahebganj P.S. Case No. 248 of 2025 registered for the offences
under Sections 126(2), 115, 117(2), 74, 76, 329(3), 303(2), 352,
109, 651(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that the named accused persons, including the petitioner,
came to her house and started abusing her and upon her protest
they assaulted her with lathi and danda. It is alleged that the
petitioner threw the informant on the ground and started
pressing her neck and thereafter assaulted her indiscriminately
with an iron rod. It has further been alleged that the other
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 82107 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
accused persons also snatched away her gold chain and
assaulted her son.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case on
account of a pre-existing dispute between the families. It has
next been submitted that the injury sustained by the informant
was on her left forearm, which is not a vital part of the body,
however, the said injury was found to be grievous in nature and
the other injury has been found to be simple in nature. It has
further been submitted that a perusal of the F.I.R. would show
that there are general and omnibus allegations against all the
accused persons without any specific role being attributed to the
petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the learned
Additional Sessions Judge has already granted bail to the co-
accused persons against whom allegations of snatching of gold
chain and criminal intimidation have been levelled. It has lastly
been submitted that the petitioner carries clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submission, facts and
circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above named be
released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 82107 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks
from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten
thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is
pending/successor court in connection with Sahebganj P.S. Case
No. 248 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with
corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to
the following conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
close relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or
in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of
the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the
Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar
nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be
at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned Court below shall verify the
criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 82107 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
any stage it is found that the petitioner has
concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below
shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be
delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
aditya/-
U
Checking your session…