Patna High Court

Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 23 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

Bail was granted to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, sought bail in a case (Ranitalab P.S. Case No. 261 of 2025) involving offences under Sections 191(1)(2), 190, 329(3)(4), 109, 117(2), 303(2) and 352 of the Bihar Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with others, entered the informant’s house armed, assaulted the informant with an iron rod causing a grievous head injury, and subsequently beat him with a lathi. The petitioner contended that he delivered only a single blow, that the injury, though grievous, was not the result of repeated attacks, and that he was falsely implicated; he also highlighted his pending antecedent case and his custody since 29‑11‑2025. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges and the alleged violence. After hearing both sides, the Court found no sufficient ground to deny bail and ordered the petitioner to be released on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties. The order effectively granted bail to the petitioner pending trial.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the offences alleged.
Whether the evidence of a single blow versus multiple assaults affects the bail decision.
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail.

Subjects

bail
criminal procedure
assault
grievous hurt
armed entry
prior antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10627 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2025 Thana- RANIYATALAB District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Nitish Kumar, Son of Kumesh Yadav, Resident of Village - Jitan Chhapara,
                 P.S. - Ranitalab, District - Patna.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :        Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Informant       :        Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State           :        Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   23-02-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

                   counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection

                   with Ranitalab P.S. Case No. 261 of 2025 registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 191(1)(2), 190, 329(3)(4),

                   109, 117(2), 303(2) and 352 of B.N.S.

                                 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the

                   petitioner along with others entered in the house of the

                   informant being armed with weapon. It is specifically alleged

                   that the petitioner has assaulted with iron rod on the head of the

                   informant due to which he received bleeding head injury. After

                   that as he got fallen away, all the accused persons assaulted with

                   lathi and iron rod.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10627 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                            2/3




                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has

          committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this

          case. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has given

          one iron rod blow on the head of the informant and from perusal

          of the injury report it will transpire that the informant has

          received one lacerated wound on the parietal region of the head.

          That injury has been opined to be grievous. Learned counsel for

          the petitioner has submitted that though the injury is grievous

          but there is no repetition of blow by the petitioner. It is alleged

          that other accused persons have assaulted as the informant fell

          down. Petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one case in

          which he is on bail. He is languishing in judicial custody since

          29.11.2025.

                       5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned

          counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the

          application for bail.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

          inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

          petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail

          bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10627 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
                                                         3/3




                       of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned

                       J.M.F.C., Danapur in connection with Ranitalab P.S. Case No.

                       261 of 2025.


                                                     (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

lata/-
U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…