Patna High Court
Ajay Singh @ Ajay Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Summary
Ajay Singh, who runs a tattoo shop, was arrested in connection with a loan fraud case (Case No. 278 of 2025) involving alleged misrepresentation to obtain a bank loan and the subsequent recovery of a vehicle from his possession. He faces charges under Sections 316(2), 319(2), 318(4), 336(2), 338 and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, had no criminal antecedent, and that the vehicle was handed to him as security for a personal loan he gave to the informant, Mrinal. The State and the informant opposed bail, arguing that the recovery of the vehicle made the petitioner a responsible party. After hearing both sides, the Court found the petitioner's claim of innocence plausible and, noting the lack of prior record, ordered that he be released on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the recovery of the vehicle and the serious charges under the B.N.S.
- Whether the alleged participation in the loan fraud constitutes a ground to deny bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(2), 338, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- loan fraud
- vehicle seizure
- criminal procedure
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89476 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-278 Year-2025 Thana- SHRIKRISHNAPURI District- Patna
======================================================
Ajay Singh @ Ajay Kumar Singh, S/O Shri Lalan Singh, R/O Village- New
Sachiwalya Campus, Phulwari P.S. Sachiwalya, Distt.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Mukul Kumari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anil Kumar, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Mohit Raj, Advocate
Mr. Ankit Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Shri Krishnapuri P.S. Case No. 278 of 2025 registered for
the offence punishable under Sections 316(2), 319(2), 318(4),
336(2), 338 and 3(5) of B.N.S.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner who is running a tattoo shop, was in need of personal
loan. Meanwhile, he met Hanuman and Aman and they
introduced him to one Mrinal. It is further alleged that all the
three persons took Rs. 5,000/- from him and introduced him to
the Branch Manager of Magadh Mahila Branch of Indian Bank.
His signature was taken on certain documents. On 29.09.2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89476 of 2025(3) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
when he went to the Branch, he came to know that a loan of Rs.
8,70,000/- has been sanctioned in his favour and that amount is
sent in the account of Karlo Automobile. When the informant
went there, he came to know that a car was given to somebody-
else.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. His name is not there in the F.I.R. During course of
investigation, the said vehicle was recovered from the
possession of this petitioner. It has further been submitted that
as the petitioner has advanced loan of Rs. 3,40,000/- to Mrinal,
Mrinal has handed over this vehicle to him in security. It has
also been submitted that petitioner is not concerned in any way
in the advancing of loan or getting the car from the agency
rather the car was handed over to him by Mrinal who has taken
loan from him and to substantiate the fact of loan. The
photocopy of certain online transactions has been filed.
Petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing
in judicial custody since 28.10.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned
counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89476 of 2025(3) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
application for bail. The learned counsel for the informant has
submitted that as the car was recovered from the petitioner, he is
the responsible person.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-
divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna in connection with Shri
Krishnapuri P.S. Case No. 278 of 2025.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…