Patna High Court
Niranjan Singh @ Niranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to a cash bond, sureties and specified conditions.
Summary
Petitioner Niranjan Singh was implicated in an FIR alleging assault with intent to kill, causing a fractured shoulder to the informant and grievous injury to her husband. He applied for anticipatory bail, claiming innocence, lack of prior criminal record, and offering to pay Rs.70,000 for the husband's medical treatment without admitting guilt. The State opposed the bail, while the informant suggested peace and acceptance of the financial assistance. The Court considered the nature of injuries, the petitioner's willingness to provide compensation, and the statutory provisions governing anticipatory bail. It granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond, sureties, and strict conditions including appearance before the trial court and non‑interference with witnesses. The order was made under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC/Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita despite the seriousness of the alleged offences.
- Whether the petitioner's offer of financial assistance influences the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 110, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 329(4), 3(5)
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- Section 438
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- bail conditions
- financial assistance
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39355 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2026 Thana- Arwal District- Arwal
======================================================
Niranjan Singh @ Niranjan Kumar S/O Late Chaneshwar Bharti R/O Village-
Bara, P.S.- Arwal, Dist.- Arwal
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Patna
2. Sanju Kumari W/O Amarjeet Singh R/O Village- Bara, P.S.- Arwal, Dist.-
Arwal
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate
For the informant : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Arwal P.S. Case No. 124 of 2026, F.I.R dated
02.04.2026 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 110, 329(4), 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant
alleged that on 01.04.2026 at about 07.00 p.m., while she was
returning to her house, the accused persons intercepted her in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39355 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/4
the lane and petitioner Niranjan Singh allegedly assaulted with
intention to kill, causing fracture of right shoulder. It is further
alleged that when the husband of the informant rushed to rescue
her, petitioner Niranjan Singh forcibly entered into the house of
the informant and assaulted him by means of iron rod on the
kneecap, as a result of which he fell unconscious. The F.I.R.
contains specific allegations and overt acts against the
petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
case. He further submits that for the same occurrence, there is
case and counter case between the parties. It is next submitted
that though there is allegation of assault against this petitioner
due to which the husband of the informant sustained grievous
injury but the injury sustained by him is not on vital part while
there is fracture and dislocation of bones. At this stage, the
petitioner proposes to provide some financial assistance to
husband of the informant in getting his medical treatment by
paying him Rs.70,000/- as a financial assistance, without
accepting his guilt as the injured is his neighbor. Lastly, it is
submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the informant has appeared and
submits that the petitioner may be directed to maintain peace
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39355 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/4
and harmony with the informant and her family and the
financial assistance as proposed.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and taking into account that the injuries have not been sustained
on vital parts and the petitioner is ready to provide financial
assistance for proper medical treatment of informant’s husband
by paying him Rs.70,000/- at the time of furnishing bail bond.
Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
8. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of
his/her 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arwal in
connection with Arwal P.S. Case No.124 of 2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39355 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
4/4
official document/personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every
date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two
consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail
cancellation of his/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) 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;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
suryadev/rajan
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.