Patna High Court
Vivek KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and surety conditions, under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
Vivek Kumar, a 20‑year‑old student with a clean record, applied for anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged alleging his involvement in a violent incident that resulted in the death of Satrudhan. The FIR charges him under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, including offences relating to murder, attempt to murder, and causing grievous hurt. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated by an informant amid a property dispute involving his relative Vijay Kumar Bhagat and that he was not alleged to have actually assaulted the deceased. The State opposed the bail but could not refute the claim that the petitioner was not directly accused of assault. Considering the lack of direct allegation against the petitioner and the potential prejudice to his future, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond and sureties, invoking Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The order directs that the bail be released if the petitioner is arrested or surrenders within six weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the FIR containing serious charges under the BNSS.
- Whether the petitioner can be considered falsely implicated in the alleged assault and murder.
- Whether Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita permits the grant of anticipatory bail in the present circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 308(2), 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- property dispute
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 482
- serious offences
- land dispute
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17210 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-130 Year-2024 Thana- PRATAPGANJ District- Supaul
======================================================
Vivek Kumar S/o Naresh Mandal R/o - Ward no. 11, Bhawanipur Dakshin,
P.S - Pratapganj, District - Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Satish Kumar Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 308(2) and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent. It is next submitted
that in sum and substance the informant alleges that the accused
persons including the petitioner came and petitioner instigated
his father, Naresh, for killing Satrudhan, on which Naresh
assaulted Satrudhan by rod causing injury on head.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17210 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
2/3
informant. It is next submitted that the informant is claiming
that the land in dispute has been purchased by him from one
Vijay Kumar Bhagat and his wife, Gauri Kumari, on 2-5-2024.
It is further submitted that petitioner and Vijay Kumar Bhagat
are related and are having dispute relating to property for which
Title Partition Suit No. 47 of 2017 is pending adjudication and
Vijay Kumar Bhagat, during pendency of the aforesaid title
partition suit, sold the land in dispute in favour of the informant,
on account of which an altercation took place leading to the
occurrence, but then it is submitted that petitioner is not alleged
to have assaulted Satrudhan. It is further submitted that copy of
the Title Partition Suit No. 47 of 2017 has been brought on
record by filing supplementary affidavit. It is also submitted that
petitioner is a student and has been falsely implicated in the
instant case being son of Naresh. It is next submitted that
petitioner is a young boy aged about 20 years and if he is sent to
judicial custody in the nature of allegation as alleged in the FIR,
his entire career would get jeopardized and chances are bright
that he may come in contact with hardened criminals.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then is not in a position to
rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17210 of 2026(3) dt.30-04-2026
3/3
of the petitioner that petitioner is not alleged to have assaulted
the deceased.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
court where the case is pending/successor court in connection
with Pratapganj P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-
U T
Checking your session…