Patna High Court
Dr. Ankit Kumar Aman @ Ankit Kumar Aman @ Ankit Anand MithileshversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Dr. Ankit Kumar Aman, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging kidnapping under Sections 363 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the informant's daughter went missing after being called to give evidence, and the informant implicated the petitioner among other accused. The petitioner argued he was not named in the FIR, that his name only appeared later based on the informant's restatement, and that there was no material linking him to the alleged crime. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the fact that the victim remained missing. After considering the gravity of the offences and the lack of evidence against the petitioner, the court rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner in the absence of material evidence linking him to the alleged kidnapping offences.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 365
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping
- IPC
- Section 363
- Section 365
- criminal procedure
- missing victim
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91108 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2023 Thana- GAMAHARIYA District- Madhepura
======================================================
Dr. Ankit Kumar Aman @ Ankit Kumar Aman @ Ankit Anand Mithilesh Son
of Ramdeo Sah R/o Vill. - Jalwar, P.S. -Gamhariya, Distt. - Madhepura.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and
365 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, on 22.03.2023, daughter of
informant went out of the house to depose in connection with
Gamhariya P.S. Case No. 57 of 2017 but did not return.
Informant believes that all the F.I.R. named accused persons,
including this petitioner, kidnapped her daughter.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has
committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R..
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91108 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2026
2/2
Name of petitioner surfaced in this case during investigation,
only on the basis of restatement of the informant. There is no
material on record to show the complicity of this petitioner in
the alleged occurrence. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner and submitted that name of petitioner transpired in
this case during investigation and the victim is still traceless.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, gravity of offence and fact that the victim is still traceless,
the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is
rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-
U T
Checking your session…