Skip to content

The research platform for Indian law — judgements, legislation and the citations between them. Free to search, with the original document behind every result.

A product of LawSathi.

Research

Search Legislation Research tools

Browse

Courts Case types Topics Most-cited judgements Sources

LawSathi

Practice platform Blog

© 2026 LawSathiTerms PrivacyResearch aid, not the official record.

Raja Saw @ Raja Sah Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Home
Patna HC
2025
Raja Saw @ Raja Sah Vs The State of BiharRaja Saw @ Raja Sah v. The State of Bihar

Dismissed¶20

Raja Saw @ Raja Sah v. The State of Bihar

ANTICIPATORY BAIL – PRAYER REJECTED

Patna HC12 Dec 2025CR. MISC./44449/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44449 of 2025, oral order dated 12-12-2025, Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey (arising out of Jamalpur P.S. Case No. 224 of 2024, Thana Jamalpur, District Munger): anticipatory bail REJECTED for petitioner Raja Saw @ Raja Sah apprehending arrest under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; prosecution alleged he was a Director of M/s Jolly Wood Industries Private Limited which solicited public participation and whose employees, including him, siphoned off investments defrauding numerous persons; parity plea founded on anticipatory bail given to co-accused driver (Priya Ranjan Kumar Rajeev @ Priya Ranjan Kumar Rajiv) on 28.08.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 57709 of 2025 did not prevail, the APP urging a 'different footing' and reliance on a co-accused's confessional statement. Search terms: anticipatory bail rejected; S.316(2)/S.318(4)/S.3(5) BNS 2023; company director; public deposit/cheating; parity refused; Munger.

What did the court decide?

Having considered the rival submissions of the parties, the Court held that the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail, and accordingly rejected his prayer for anticipatory bail. ¶20

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who apprehends arrest in Jamalpur P.S. Case No. 224 of 2024 registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Having considered the rival submissions of the parties, the Court held that the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail, and accordingly rejected his prayer for anticipatory bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ANTICIPATORY BAIL — PRAYER REJECTED — High Court of Judicature at Patna, Criminal Miscellaneous No. 44449 of 2025 (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey, oral order dated 12-12-2025), arising out of Jamalpur P.S. Case No. 224 of 2024, Thana Jamalpur, District Munger, registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner, Raja Saw @ Raja Sah, whom the prosecution alleges to have been one of the Directors of M/s Jolly Wood Industries Private Limited — said to have solicited involvement from the public at large, with all employees, including the petitioner, allegedly siphoning off the investment and thereby defrauding a number of persons — apprehended arrest and sought anticipatory bail. His counsel pleaded innocence, claimed he had no concern with the company's bank/money transactions, and pointed to the anticipatory bail granted on 28.08.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 57709 of 2025 to co-accused Priya Ranjan Kumar Rajeev @ Priya Ranjan Kumar Rajiv, a driver of the company. The learned APP (Mr. J. N. Thakur) opposed the prayer, contending that this petitioner stood on a different footing from that co-accused and that the petitioner's complicity had emerged in a co-accused's confessional statement (contention of counsel, reported). Holding the petitioner not deserving of the privilege of anticipatory bail, the Court rejected his prayer.

A

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44449 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-224 Year-2024 Thana- JAMALPUR District- Munger

======================================================

Raja Saw @ Raja Sah S/O Garib Saw R/O Village- Nayatola Keshopur, P.SJamalpur, Distt.- Munger.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sheo Nandan Prasad, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. J. N. Thakur, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY

ORAL ORDER

6 12-12-2025

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in Jamalpur P.S. Case No. 224 of 2024 registered under Sections316(2), 318(4) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The prosecution alleges that the petitioner, along with others, was one of the Directors of the company, namely, M/s Jolly Wood Industries Private Limited, which is said to have been involved in soliciting involvement from the public at large. However, all the employees, including the petitioner, siphoned off the said investment, and thereby a number of persons have been defrauded.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44449 of 2025(6) dt.12-12-2025 2/2

that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He has no concern with the bank transactions of the company. He has also submitted that co-accused Priya Ranjan Kumar Rajeev @ Priya Ranjan Kumar Rajiv, a driver of the company, has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 28.08.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 57709 of 2025. The petitioner has no role in money transaction of the company.

On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that the case of this petitioner stands on different footing to that of co-accused Priya Ranjan Kumar who has been granted anticipatory bail by this court. He was driver of the said company. Furthermore, in the confessional statement of co-accused, the complicity of the petitioner emerged in this case.

Having considered the rival submission of the parties, I am of the view that the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail and accordingly, the same is rejected .

(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J)

A.K.V.//-

U T

Issues for consideration

1 issue framed by the court

AI extract

1.
Whether the petitioner, who apprehends arrest in Jamalpur P.S. Case No. 224 of 2024 registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, deserves to be granted anticipatory bail.¶14
The court held
Having considered the rival submissions of the parties, the Court held that the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail, and accordingly rejected his prayer for anticipatory bail.ratio¶20

Cases cited

Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority

AI extract

Cr. Misc. No. 57709 of 2025Referred¶18

Statutes considered

3 provisions across 1 enactments

AI extract

Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023Section 316(2)¶14 Section 318(4)¶14 Section 3(5)¶14

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Jamalpur P.S. Case No. 224 of 2024 (Thana Jamalpur, District Munger) registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; the petitioner apprehends arrest therein.¶14
Prior proceeding
Prosecution allegation: petitioner, along with others, was one of the Directors of M/s Jolly Wood Industries Private Limited, which is said to have been involved in soliciting involvement from the public at large.¶15
Prior proceeding
Further prosecution allegation: all employees of the company, including the petitioner, siphoned off the investment collected from the public, whereby a number of persons have been defrauded.¶15
Prior proceeding
As submitted by petitioner's counsel, co-accused Priya Ranjan Kumar Rajeev @ Priya Ranjan Kumar Rajiv, a driver of the company, had been granted anticipatory bail by this Court on 28.08.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 57709 of 2025; the learned APP countered that this petitioner stood on a different footing and that his complicity had emerged in a co-accused's confessional statement.¶18

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Raja Saw @ Raja Sah S/O Garib Saw R/O Village- Nayatola Keshopur, P.SJamalpur, Distt.- Munger¶4
Sheo Nandan Prasad
respondent
The State of Bihar¶7
J. N. Thakur

Coram

AI extract

Nawneet Kumar Pandeyauthor¶10

Case details

As recorded by the court registry

Court: Patna HC
Decided on: 12 Dec 2025 · December
Registered: 30 Jun 2025
Case no.: CR. MISC./44449/2025
CNR: BRHC010629712025
Bench: Nawneet Kumar Pandey
Disposal: DISMISSED
Case type: Criminal Miscellaneous

Similar cases

Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court

Finding judgements on the same questions…

More from Nawneet Kumar Pandey

Hulash Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar
11 Dec 2025
Akash Paswan Vs The State of Bihar
11 Dec 2025
Niraj Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar
11 Dec 2025
Parsuram Pandey Vs Sri Krishna Pandey
12 Dec 2025
Chandra Shekhar Singh Vs The State of Bihar
12 Dec 2025
Harendra Paswan Vs The State of Bihar
12 Dec 2025

Cite this judgement

Raja Saw @ Raja Sah v. The State of Bihar, CR. MISC./44449/2025 (PAT), decided on 12 December 2025.

The Patna High Court publishes no neutral citation for this judgement — cite it by case number and date of decision.

Cases cited1

Cr. Misc. No. 57709 of 2025Referred¶18

Open Authorities

Statutes3

Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023Section 316(2) · Section 318(4) · Section 3(5)

View all statutes

Procedural history4

Jamalpur P.S. Case No. 224 of 2024 (Thana Jamalpur, District Munger) registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; the petitioner apprehends arrest therein.
Prosecution allegation: petitioner, along with others, was one of the Directors of M/s Jolly Wood Industries Private Limited, which is said to have been involved in soliciting involvement from the public at large.

View full history

Bench / Coram

Nawneet Kumar Pandey

Parties & counsel