Dismissed¶14

Niraj Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Dec 2025CR. MISC./31629/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail rejected; Section 23, Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (PC & PNDT) Act, 1994; ultrasound centres sealed at Mopati Bazar, Tarari, Bhojpur; complaint by Civil Surgeon, Bhojpur; BDO Tarari inquiry report; Patna High Court Criminal Miscellaneous No.31629 of 2025, order dated 11-12-2025; Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey; petitioner directed to surrender and seek regular bail on its own merit.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail is not granted to the petitioner; the application is rejected in view of the facts and circumstances, including the inquiry report showing the petitioner was allegedly running 'Maa Ultrasound' illegally without producing the documents required for running an ultrasound centre. ¶14

Niraj Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Niraj Kumar Singh, who apprehends arrest in Complaint Case No. 78(o) of 2023 registered for offences punishable under Section 23 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994.

¶7

Court's answer

¶14

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below and seek regular bail; if he does so, the regular bail application shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail rejected. Patna High Court (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J), Criminal Miscellaneous No.31629 of 2025, oral order dated 11-12-2025: petitioner Niraj Kumar Singh apprehended arrest in Complaint Case No. 78(o) of 2023 (arising out of PS Case No. 78 of 2023, Government Official Comp. PS, Bhojpur), registered for offences punishable under Sections 23 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994. A district-level inspection drive (20.05.2023 to 21.05.2023) under orders of the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police found Vishnu Ultrasound and Maa Ultrasound at Mopati Bazar, Tarari operating without required documents and the centres were sealed; the inspection report recorded that operators Rakesh Kumar and Neeraj Kumar (petitioner) violated the provisions of the PC & PNDT Act, 1994. The inquiry report of the Block Development Officer, Tarari, annexed to the complaint filed by the Civil Surgeon, Bhojpur, indicated the petitioner was allegedly running 'Maa Ultrasound' illegally. Holding himself not inclined to grant anticipatory bail, the judge rejected the application and directed the petitioner to surrender and seek regular bail, to be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31629 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2023 Thana- GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL COMP. District- Bhojpur

¶3

====================================================== Niraj Kumar Singh S/o Om Prakash Singh R/o Village- Patarihan, Ward No 3, Nawada, PS- Sahar, Distt.- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================
Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Braj Kishore Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Yogendra Kumar ======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

ORAL ORDER

4 11-12-2025

Heard the parties.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 78(o) of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 23 of pre conception and pre Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994.

¶8

The prosecution case, in brief, is that as per the complaint filed by the Civil Surgeon, Bhojpur, a district-level inspection drive was conducted from 20.05.2023 to 21.05.2023 under the orders of the District Magistrate and Superintendent of Police. During inspection of Vishnu Ultrasound and Maa Ultrasound at Mopati Bazar, Tarari, the operators allegedly failed to produce any required documents and the centres were sealed. In the inspection report, it was detected that the operators, Rakesh Kumar and Neeraj Kumar (petitioner) violated the provisions of the PC & PNDT Act, 1994.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that at the time of the inspection, the shop was closed and no incriminating article whatsoever was

¶10

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31629 of 2025(4) dt.11-12-2025 2/2

¶11

recovered by the inspection team. The ultrasound machine was not physically examined, nor was the shop opened or inspected in presence of the petitioner. The petitioner is a person of clean antecedent.

¶12

On the other hand, learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶13

From perusal of the inquiry report of the Block Development Officer, Tarari, Bhojpur, which is annexed with the complaint petition, it appears that the petitioner was allegedly running an ultrasound centre in the name and style as “Maa Ultrasound’ in an illegal manner. The report clearly indicates that the petitioner failed to produce any document as required under the provisions for running an ultrasound centre.

¶14

Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, it is rejected .

¶15

The petitioner is directed to surrender in the court below and seek regular bail. If the petitioner does so, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

¶16

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

Niraj Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niraj Kumar Singh v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Premavtar Bharti @ Firoz Bharti@ Firoz Bhari Vs The State of Bihar

Vivek Mishra Vs The State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Hulash Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Akash Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Pritam Kumar Vs The State of Bihar