Patna High Court
Pankaj Kumar Sharma @ Pankaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail, given his fair antecedent and the nature of the allegations.
Summary
The petitioner, Pankaj Kumar Sharma, was implicated in a police case (No.338 of 2022) alleging offences under several IPC sections (341, 342, 344, 323, 386, 387, 420, 120(B)/34) and Section 79 of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015. He was said to be a member of an interview committee that took money from an informant and later, when the informant wanted to quit a sales‑representative job, the petitioner allegedly assaulted and tried to confine him. The petitioner applied for pre‑arrest bail, contending that he had a fair antecedent, that the FIR was omnibus and that the alleged assault was not proven. The State opposed, alleging the petitioner was part of a syndicate exploiting victims. The Court, after considering the nature of the accusations and the petitioner’s clean record, granted bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and additional conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite the serious offences alleged in the FIR.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 323, 34, 341, 342, 344, 386, 387, 420
- Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 — s. 79
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- criminal procedure
- IPC offences
- juvenile justice
- syndicate exploitation
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90731 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-338 Year-2022 Thana- BANKA District- Banka
======================================================
Pankaj Kumar Sharma @ Pankaj Kumar Son of Umesh Sharma Village-
Rasaunk PS and District -Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brij Nandan Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Banka P.S. Case No. 338 of 2022, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 344, 323, 386,
387, 420 and 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
79 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act,
2015.
3. The petitioner is said to be one of the member of
the interview committee, who took interview of the informant
and his friend, after realizing Rs. 16,000/- and further extracted
Rs. 10,000/- for the purposes of lodging and further have been
allowed to work as a sales representative. When the informant
and others did not satisfy with the work and wanted to leave the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90731 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
job, the petitioner along with others have assaulted them and
illegally tried to confine.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner taking this
Court through the FIR contended that admittedly, the petitioner
was called upon by his friend and after proper participation in
interview, he was taken in the job. But since he was not
interested in performing the duty, on instigation of some
unscrupulous persons, the present FIR has been instituted
against nine named accused persons, besides fifteen unknown
persons. So far the allegation of causing assault or restraining
the informant and others are concerned, the same is omnibus in
nature. All the more, it is the admitted position that the amount
has been realized for the purposes of extending lodging and
fooding facilities, besides the cost of interview. The petitioner
bears fair antecedent and he undertakes that he will fully co-
operate in the proceeding of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that prima
facie it appears that the petitioner is a member of a syndicate,
who used to exploit innocent persons by extracting money on
the pretext of providing job.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90731 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
behalf of the parties and considering the nature of accusation
agaisnt the petitioner, as also the fact that the informant was
allowed to work as a sales representative, after proper interview
and he was not interested to perform the duty, besides the
petitioner having absolutely fair antecedent, let the petitioner
above named 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
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banka in connection with Banka P.S.
Case No. 338 of 2022, 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)
shivank/-
U T
Checking your session…