IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10735 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-340 Year-2025 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1. Nidhi Devi Wife of Ajay Kumar R/o- village- Daulatabad, P.S.- Mohammdabad / Mohammabad , Dist- Ghajipur, Uttar Pradesh (UP). 2. Ajay Kumar Son of Binod Ram @ Binod Nut R/o- village- Daulatabad, P.S.- Mohammdabad / Mohammabad , Dist- Ghajipur, Uttar Pradesh (UP). 3. Manisha Devi Wife of Mohan Kumar @ Mohan Ram Resident of village- Jauhurabad, Chhak janar (Chakjanav), PS- Bareshar, Dist-Ghajipur, Uttar Pradesh (UP), ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 3 01-04-2026 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 punishable under Sections 303(2) of the BNS with subsequently Sections 112, 317(2) and 317(5) of the BNS being added in connection with Sasaram (M) P.S.Case No. 340 of 2025. 3. As per the prosecution case, while the informant on the fateful day, had gone to perform puja in a Temple, she found her golden chain of 10 gms missing. Despite frantic effort, she could not find her ornament. It is alleged that it were the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10735 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026 2/2 petitioners who orchestrated the occurrence. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of suspicion, and not a single witness has supported the alleged occurrence. 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. 6. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the three petitioners which prima facie appears that the three petitioners are part of a gang and have committed the offence in an organized manner. All three petitioners have several criminal antecedents and, therefore, it appears that they are habitual offenders. If released on anticipatory bail, there is a possibility of repeating the similar offence. 7. Under these circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. It is, accordingly, rejected. HR/- (Alok Kumar Sinha, J) U T