Patna High Court
Vishal KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to conditions, as the prosecution failed to produce an injury report and the petitioner gave a satisfactory undertaking.
Summary
The petitioner, Vishal Kumar, sought bail in a case (PS Case No. 106 of 2025) alleging offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including robbery, assault and attempt to murder. The alleged incident involved the petitioner and other accused assaulting an informant, snatching a golden chain with a pistol and allegedly taking Rs 1,50,000. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that the informant sustained no injury and that the investigating officer failed to produce an injury report, rendering the charge of grievous hurt superfluous. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the specific accusations of snatching valuables. The court, noting the lack of an injury report and the petitioner’s undertaking, granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, one of whom must be a close relative, and imposed a condition for cancellation if the petitioner intimidates witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite serious charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the failure of the investigating officer to produce an injury report justifies granting bail.
- Whether there is a risk of the petitioner tampering with or intimidating the informant and witnesses.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 118(1), 127(2), 303(2), 308(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- injury report
- witness intimidation
- robbery
- assault
- section 482
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2786 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2025 Thana- MUSRIGHRARI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Vishal Kumar, Son of Digvijay Kumar Singh @ Digvijay Prasad Singh, R/o
Village - Bathua Bujurg, Ward No. 15, P.S. - Musrigharari, Distt.- Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate
Mr. Ranjeet Patel, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Musrigharari P.S. Case No. 106 of 2025
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 127(2),
115(2), 118(1), 303(2), 308(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. On the fateful night, three named accused persons,
including the petitioner, along with 4-5 unknown persons riding
on three motorcycles came to the shop of the informant and
assaulted him. It is specifically alleged that co-accused Aman
Kumar tried to press the neck of the informant. In the
meanwhile, this petitioner by putting a pistol snatched golden
chain. There is further allegation against the other accused
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2786 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
persons of taking away Rs.1,50,000/-, which was kept in the
shop.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
on account of previous animosity, the name of the petitioner has
been implicated in this case. Moreover, in the said occurrence,
the informant has not sustained any injury. This fact stands
fortified from the impugned order that despite the repeated
direction of the learned Sessions Judge, the Investigating Officer
has failed to produce the injury report. So far the allegation of
snatching of valuable is concerned, the same is superfluous only
in order to make the crime grievous in nature. The petitioner
though bears one criminal antecedent, however, he is on bail in
the said case and he undertakes that he will fully cooperate in
the proceeding of the court.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State
vehemently opposes the bail application and submits that there
is specific accusation against the petitioner of snatching golden
chain and cash amount.
6. Having considered the submissions advanced by
the learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note
of the nature of accusation, coupled with the fact that the
investigating officer failed to produce the injury report, besides
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2786 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
the undertaking of the petitioner, let the petitioner, named
above, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court
below within four weeks from the date of receipt/production of
a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds
of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Samastipur in connection with Musrigharari P.S.
Case No. 106 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 with the further following conditions:
(a) One of the bailors shall be the own/close relative
of the petitioner.
(b) If the petitioner is found indulged in intimidating
and threatening the informant and the witnesses, the State and
the informant shall be at liberty to file an application before the
jurisdictional court for cancellation of the bail bonds.
(Harish Kumar, J)
uday/-
U T
Checking your session…