Patna High Court
Aditya KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted as the evidence does not conclusively establish the petitioner’s role in the fatal injury, subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Aditya Kumar, sought bail in a Sessions trial for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita arising from a land‑dispute‑related assault that allegedly caused the death of Pankaj Kumar. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner struck the deceased on the back of the head with an iron rod, leading to a skull fracture, while the defence argued that the post‑mortem report showed injuries inconsistent with that allegation and that there was a counter‑case against other persons. The court noted the lack of clear medical evidence linking the petitioner to the fatal injury and considered that co‑accused had already been granted bail. Consequently, the court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail with a bond of Rs.10,000 and specific conditions. The decision emphasized cooperation with the trial and non‑tampering with evidence as conditions for continued bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being charged with offences under Sections 126(1), 115(2), 109(1), 351, 352, 3(5) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the post‑mortem findings sufficiently establish the petitioner’s involvement in the fatal assault.
- Whether the granting of bail to other accused in related cases influences the bail decision for the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 109(1), 115(2), 126(1), 3(5), 351, 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- homicide
- post‑mortem report
- land dispute
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2765 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2025 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Aditya Kumar S/O Late Upendra Kushwaha Resident of Village- Gareya
Khal, P.S- Gopalpur, District- Gopalganj, Bihar.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prasoon Shekhar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shahabuddin Azeem @ S. Azeem, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Shubhesh Pandey, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
A.P.P for the State as well as learned counsel for the
informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Sessions Trial No. 681 of 2025, arising out of Gopalpur P.S.
Case No. 21 of 2025 dated 22.01.2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 126(1), 115(2), 109(1),
351, 352 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Further, Section 103(1) of the B.N.S. was added later on.
3. As per the prosecution case, in the background
of land dispute, the petitioner and other family members
assaulted the informant and his family members and it is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2765 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/5
further alleged that the petitioner assaulted on the back side
of the head of the deceased Pankaj Kumar with iron rod
causing fracture on his head. During course of treatment,
the deceased died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in
this case. It is submitted that there is case and counter case
between the parties. The counter case bearing Gopalpur
(Gopalganj) P.S. Case No. 22 of 2025 has been lodged by
the petitioner himself. The allegation in the counter case is
that Durga Bhagat and Virendra Bhagat assaulted with lathi
and iron rod on the person of the father of the petitioner i.e.,
the informant due to which he sustained grievous injury and
died during the course of treatment. It is submitted that said
Durga Bhagat and Virendra Bhagat have been granted bail
by this Court vide Criminal Miscellaneous No. 33318 of
2025 and Criminal Miscellaneous No. 61093 of 2025
respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently
submitted that there is specific allegation against the
petitioner that he assaulted with iron rod on the back side of
the head of the deceased. The post-mortem report does not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2765 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
3/5
support the prosecution case. The ante-mortem injury found
by the Doctor shows two injuries:- (i). Contused swelling
over forehead of size 6cm x 4cm, on cutting skin
underneath hematoma with skull bone fractured, brain
membrane hematoma present. (ii). Contused swelling over
both eye all around, on cutting skin underneath hematoma
present. There is no mention about the injury on the back
side of the head. It is further submitted that in paragraph
nos. 63 and 64, the witnesses Shiv Prasad Bhagat and Ram
Pujan Bhagat stated that there was a free fight between the
parties due to land dispute. Further, it is submitted that the
informant is the grandfather of the petitioner and the
petitioner is a young boy aged about 24 years. The
petitioner is in custody since 23.01.2025, having no
criminal antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted in
the case.
5. Learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel
for the informant opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and submitted that there is specific allegation
against the petitioner that he assaulted on the head of the
deceased due to which he died. The post-mortem report
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2765 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
4/5
supports the allegation against the petitioner. It is further
submitted that ante-mortem injury reveals the skull bone
fracture caused due to assault by the petitioner. There is
only one assault on the person of the deceased. Further, it is
submitted that in the counter case, there is allegation against
two persons of assaulting on the head of the father of the
petitioner but single injury was found on the head of the
deceased and for that reason, the petitioners of the counter
case were granted bail.
6. Having considered the submissions of learned
counsel for the parties and the relation of the parties as well
as ante-mortem injury found on the person of the deceased,
let the petitioner be released on bail upon furnishing bail
bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Gopalganj in connection
with Sessions Trial No. 681 of 2025, arising out of
Gopalpur P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025, subject to the following
conditions:-
1. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and
shall be properly represented on each and every
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2765 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
5/5
date fixed by the Court and on his absence on two
consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail
bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
2. One of the bailors will be his own blood
relation, preferably father, mother, brother, sister
and or his wife.
3. The bailor shall also state on affidavit that
he will inform the court concerned if the petitioner
is made accused in any other case of similar nature
after his release in the present case and thereafter
the court below will be at liberty to initiate the
proceeding for cancellation of bail on ground of
misuse.
4. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence
or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will
be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(Khatim Reza, J)
prabhat/-
U T
Checking your session…