Allowed¶19

Alok Kumar Ranjan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC9 Jun 2026CR. MISC./37288/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court (Chandra Shekhar Jha, J., 09-06-2026) allows anticipatory bail in Crl. Misc. No. 37288 of 2026 arising from Daudnagar P.S. Case No. 126 of 2026 (Aurangabad) under BNS 2023 ss. 318(2), 319(2), 271, 272 and PCPNDT Act ss. 4, 18, 23; owner of unlicensed ultrasound clinic; prima facie no prenatal-detection allegation; clean antecedents; bail bond Rs. 10,000 with two like sureties; conditions u/s 482(2) BNSS.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned trial Court within four weeks of the order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. ¶19

Alok Kumar Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶19

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in Daudnagar P.S. Case No. 126 of 2026 (offences under Sections 318(2), 319(2), 271, 272 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 18, 23 of the PCPNDT Act, 1994), should be released on anticipatory bail. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

In the event of arrest or surrender before the learned trial Court within four weeks of the order, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶19

Ratio / Principle

Taking note of the facts prima facie, the allegation of prenatal detection is not available against the petitioner, who is a man of clean antecedent.

¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail - Accused apprehending arrest in Daudnagar P.S. Case No. 126 of 2026 registered under Sections 318(2), 319(2), 271, 272 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 4, 18, 23 of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act, 1994 - Allegation that petitioner ran an ultrasound clinic without a valid licence from the competent authority - Counsel contended no complaint of misuse of the ultrasound machine; machine allegedly run under supervision of a qualified MBBS doctor; licence application pending when raid occurred; no complaint of prenatal detection - Court prima facie found no allegation of prenatal detection against the petitioner, a man of clean antecedent - Petitioner directed to be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within four weeks, on bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37288 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-126 Year-2026 Thana- DAUDNAGAR District- Aurangabad

¶3

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

¶4

Alok Kumar Ranjan Son of Late Bhupendra Singh @ Upendra Prasad Singh @ Upendra Mahto Resident of Village- Budhaura, P.S.- Alauli, DistrictKhagaria.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mr.Purushottam Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, APP ======================================================

¶6

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶7

2 09-06-2026

¶8

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶9

petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State.

¶10

The accused/petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Daudnagar P.S. Case No. 126 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(2), 319(2), 271, 272 of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita 2023 and Sections 4, 18. 23 of the Pre Conception & Natal Diagnostic Techniques, Act 1994.

¶11

The allegation against the petitioner is to run the ultrasound clinic without valid license issued by competent authority.

¶12

It is submitted by Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur,

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37288 of 2026(2) dt.09-06-2026 2/3

¶14

learned counsel appearing for petitioner that no complaint regarding misuse of ultrasound machine was made against this petitioner and in fact, the allegation suggest that the ultrasound machine was run under the supervision of a qualified MBBS doctor having expertise in radiological examination i.e. one Dr. Arvind Kumar Nanda, a Medical Officer of Sadar Hosptial, Jahanabad. It is submitted that the petitioner being the owner applied for license before concern authority but instead to to process application, the alleged raid was made and, thereafter, present F.I.R was lodged purely on basis of suspicion that in future the centre may be misused for prenatal detection. It is pointed out that no allegation or complaint qua prenatal detection is available against petitioner, who is a man of clean antecedent.

¶15

Learned APP opposed the prayer of bail.

¶16

In view of aforesaid factual submissions and by

¶17

taking note of fact as prima facie, the allegation of prenatal detection is not available against this petitioner, who is a man of clean antecedent accordingly, above named petitioner, in the event of her arrest or surrender before the

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37288 of 2026(2) dt.09-06-2026 3/3

¶19

learned trial Court, within a period of four weeks of the order, is directed to be released on bail furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Daudnagar/concerned Court, where the case is pending in connection with Daudnagar P.S. Case No. 126 of 2026 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶20

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶21

veena/-

¶22

U T

Alok Kumar Ranjan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alok Kumar Ranjan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Ray @ Umesh Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Dipak Kumar @ Deepak Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sakaldev Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjeeta Devi @ Sangita Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Suman Kumar Vs The State of Bihar