Patna High Court
Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court extended anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to a cash bond and specified conditions.
Summary
Vivek Kumar petitioned the Patna High Court for anticipatory bail in connection with a police case alleging multiple offences under the Indian Penal Code, including waging war against the state and assault. The prosecution alleged that Kumar, after being taken to the police station, resisted arrest, broke a lock‑up door and injured two police officers. The petitioner argued that he had previously been granted privilege under Section 35(3) of the Bihar Police Act and was willing to appear in trial and compensate the injured officers. The State opposed, citing the petitioner’s alleged disruptive conduct and criminal antecedents. The Court, noting the earlier privilege and the petitioner’s willingness to comply with conditions, granted anticipatory bail with a cash bond and several strict conditions, including monthly police attendance and a payment of Rs. 10,000 to the victims.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the alleged offences
- Whether the prior privilege under Section 35(3) of the Bihar Police Act influences the grant of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
- Bihar Police Act — s. 35(3)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 115(2), 117(2), 121(1), 121(2), 132, 221, 222, 224, 324(3), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Bihar Police Act
- bail conditions
- victim compensation
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31285 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2026 Thana- AMBA District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Kumar Singh S/o Sanjay Kumar Singh R/o Village -
Mudila @ Murila Road Amba, P.S. - Amba, District - Aurangabad.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Sakshi Deep, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 07-05-2026 Heard Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior
counsel for the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Amba P.S. Case No. 25 of 2026 for the offence
under sections 132, 121(1), 121(2), 115(2), 117(2), 221, 222,
224, 324(3), 352 and 351(2) of the BNS lodged on 19.02.2026
by the informant, Suraj Kumar.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that the petitioner-accused was apprehended in Amba P.S. Case
No. 10/2026 but when he was brought to the Police Station, he
started abusing and choose not to sign the arrest memo. As he
was put in the lockup, he broke open the door, came out and
when the Police tried to prevent him, they suffered injuries by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31285 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/4
the hand of this petitioner. This followed the present FIR.
4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has taken
this Court to the Annexure-2 to show that the learned CJM,
Aurangabad in its order dated 20.02.2026 gave the privilege of
Section 35(3) of the BNSs, but now, that the charge-sheet has
been submitted, he has come before this Court. The petitioner is
ready to diligently appear in trial and shall not indulge in any
criminal activity. Further, the submission is that without
accepting the allegation and/or the outcome of the present
petition in view of the fact that the informant’s side has alleged
injuries, the petitioner on its own would like to contribute Rs.
5,000/- each to the two injured (Deepak Kumar and Suraj
Kumar) (totalling Rs. 10,000/-) towards the medical assistance
through Demand Draft issued by the local State Bank of
India/any Nationalized Bank branch to be submitted before the
‘NAZARAT’ of concerned Court to be handed over to the
informant after checking the credentials.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that he
created chaos in the Police station after being brought as an
accused and he has criminal antecedent also.
6. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
as also that earlier, the learned CJM gave him privilege of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31285 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
3/4
Section 35(3) of the BNSs and now, when the charge-sheet has
been submitted, he has promptly knocked the doors of Patna
High Court, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend
him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions subject to
payment of Rs. 5,000/- each to the two injured (Deepak Kumar
and Suraj Kumar) (totalling Rs. 10,000/-) as undertaken by the
learned counsel for the petitioner to be paid by Demand Draft of
local State Bank of India branch/any Nationalized bank branch
to be submitted to the Trial Court.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of
arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Aurangabad in connection with
Amba P.S. Case No. 25 of 2026 subject to the following
conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhaar Card/Voter ID Card/Pan Card/Driving
License) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31285 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
4/4
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned
police station every month for six months to mark his
attendance and after the end of the period, the certificate shall be
submitted before the Trial Court failing which steps shall be
taken for the cancellation of the bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Adnan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.