Patna High Court
Kundan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
Kundan Kumar was named in an FIR relating to a protest against the Agnipath Scheme, alleged to have participated in mob violence and property damage under multiple IPC sections and the Damage of Public Property Act. He contended that he has a clean antecedent, was falsely implicated, and that his name was derived only from a co‑accused's confession, with no specific allegation of assault against him. The prosecution opposed his bail, while the court noted that similar co‑accused had been granted anticipatory bail and that the petitioner's case lacked a distinct overt act. Considering the absence of specific charges, the petitioner's clean record, and the precedent of bail to co‑accused, the court ordered his release on bail subject to conditions under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023. The bail bond was set at Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and several compliance conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious offences alleged in the FIR
- Whether the lack of specific allegation of assault against the petitioner warrants bail
Legislation cited
- BNSS, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 332, 333, 337, 338, 341, 353, 427, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- mob violence
- false implication
- clean antecedent
- Agnipath Scheme protest
- IPC offences
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2720 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2022 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna
======================================================
Kundan Kumar Son of Tarun Singh R/o Village - Ratan Tola, P.S. - Maner,
Dist. - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vidyapati, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 16-01-2026 Heard Mr. Vidyapati, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Khagaul P.S. Case No. 168 of 2022, F.I.R.
dated 17.06.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections
147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 332, 333, 353, 427, 307, 120(B), 337,
338, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and section 3/4 of Damage of
Public Property Act.
3. As per the First Information Report, the informant
alleged that the petitioner was a member of mob who were
protesting against the Agnipath Scheme of Government. It is
further alleged that after sometime the protesters in aggressive
manner started damaging the vehicles present there and they
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2720 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
2/4
vandalized the police vehicle and set private vehicles on fire.
They threw bricks and stones on the police force due to which
the police personnel got severe injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
Initially, the petitioner was not named in the F.I.R., the name of
the petitioner has been transpired on the basis of confessional
statement of apprehended co-accused, namely, Vikki Kumar.
From a bare perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that there is no
specific allegation of assault or overt act attributed against the
petitioner rather the allegation is general and omnibus in nature
and similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Gajraj
Kumar and Tannu Kumar have been granted anticipatory bail by
a coordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Court vide order dated
09.10.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 71435 of 2025 and another
co-accused persons, namely, Manish Kumar and Chotu Kumar
have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order
dated 29.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50387 of 2025.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2720 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
3/4
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that the petitioner has clean antecedent, there is no
specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against
the petitioner and similarly co-accused persons have been
granted bail by different Coordinate Benches of this Hon’ble
Court, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest
or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty
days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 learned
A.C.J.M., 5th, Danapur in connection with Khagaul P.S. Case
No. 168 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section
482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2720 of 2026(2) dt.16-01-2026
4/4
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…