Patna High Court
Abhishek KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court conditionally ordered bail if the informant confirms the compromise, otherwise bail bonds shall not be accepted.
Summary
The petitioner, Abhishek Kumar, sought relief from imminent arrest in a case (Minapur P.S. Case No. 336 of 2024) alleging assault on an informant under multiple sections of the BNS. The prosecution alleged the petitioner assaulted the informant, while the petitioner claimed innocence and asserted that the parties had settled their dispute. The court examined the petitioner's request for bail, emphasizing the need to verify any compromise between the parties. It directed the lower court to ascertain whether the informant corroborates the compromise; if so, the petitioner may obtain bail upon furnishing a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482 BNSS. If the informant does not support the compromise, the bail bond would be rejected. The application was disposed with these directions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted pending verification of a compromise between the petitioner and the informant
- Whether the informant's support for the compromise is a condition for granting bail
- Application of Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Section 482 of the BNSS in the bail context
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 351(3), 352, 74
- BNSS — s. 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- bail
- compromise
- Criminal Procedure
- Section 438
- Section 482
- assault
- informant
- verification of compromise
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19971 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-336 Year-2024 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Abhishek Kumar Son of Manohar Kumar Chaudhary @ Manohar Chaudhary
Resident of Village - Mustafaganj, P.S.- Minapur, District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Pandey
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pronoti Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 30-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in
connection with Minapur P.S. Case No. 336 of 2024 registered
for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 74, 109,
303(2), 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation
against the petitioner is of assaulting the informant.
4. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for
the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely
been implicated in this case. He further submits that the parties
have settled their dispute.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts, this application
is disposed of with a direction to the concerned Court below to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19971 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
2/2
verify the factum of compromise between the parties. If the
informant supports the factum of compromise then the
petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the concerned Court below within four weeks from
today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court below in
connection with Minapur P.S. Case No. 336 of 2024, subject to
the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 / Section 482 of the BNSS. If the
informant does not supports the factum of compromise then the
bail bonds of the petitioner shall not be accepted.
6. With the aforesaid directions, this application is
disposed of.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U
Checking your session…