Patna High Court
Vinay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, Vinay Kumar and Sanjit Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in connection with FIR No.142/2022 relating to a protest against the Agniveer Scheme that involved rioting, arson, and looting. They were not originally named in the FIR; their names were later added based on a co-accused's confessional statement. The petitioners argued they have clean antecedents and that similarly situated co‑accused have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. The State opposed the relief, contending the seriousness of the offences. Considering the clean record, the precedent of bail to co‑accused, and the lack of specific allegations against the petitioners, the Court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the CrPC, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 each and several conditions regarding cooperation, presence, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC despite the serious nature of the offences alleged in the FIR.
- Whether the clean antecedent of the petitioners and the grant of anticipatory bail to similarly situated co‑accused justify the relief.
Legislation cited
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- clean antecedent
- protest
- Indian Penal Code offences
- bail conditions
- court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43428 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2022 Thana- MOHIUDDIN NAGAR District-
Samastipur
======================================================
1. Vinay Kumar Son of Ramawdesh @ Boudhi
2. Sanjit Kumar @ Sanjeet Kumar Son of Baidhyanath Rai
Both are Resident of Village - Tetarpur, P.S.- Mohiuddinnagar, District -
Samastipur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate
: Mr.Binay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-07-2026 Heard Mr.Krishna Kant Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioners and Mr.Anil Kumar, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Mohiuddinagar P.S.Case No.142 of 2022, FIR
dated 17.06.2022 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections147/149/341/342/323/324/307/353/332/333/337/338/42
7/436/188/379/380/506 and 34 of Indian Penal Code.
3. According to prosecution case, 13 FIR named
accused persons along with 200 unknown persons protested the
Agniveer Scheme by creating ruckus on Mohiuddin Nagar
Railway Station. It is also alleged that the accused persons set
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43428 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
2/4
fire in Lohit express train and also looted good and articles of
the passengers.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have clean antecedent. Petitioners are not named in
the FIR. The name of the petitioners has been transpired during
investigation on the basis of the confessional statement of co-
accused person, namely, Vivek Rai which was recorded in
paragraph-41 of the case diary. As per allegation in the FIR,
altogether 200 persons protested the Agniveer Scheme by
creating ruckus on Mohiuddin Nagar Railway Station. Learned
counsel for the petitioners submits that there is no specific
allegation against the petitioners rather there is general and
omnibus allegation against 200 persons including the
petitioners. Initially the petitioners were not named in the FIR.
Further submits that similarly situated co-accused persons
namely Chikku @ Chikku Kumar @ Sushil Yadav has been
granted privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order
dated 18.01.2024 in passed Cr. Misc No. 84440 of 2023 and
another co-accused persons namely Anant Kumar @ Ankit
Kumar and Pintu Kumar Ray have been granted privilege of
anticipatory bail by different Co-ordinate Benches of this
Hon’ble Court vide order dated 20.03.2023 passed in Cr. Misc
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43428 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
3/4
No. 66374 of 2022 and 06.09.2023 passed in Cr. Misc No.
45854 of 2023 and co-accused person, namely, Navin Kumar @
Sabnam Singh has also been granted privilege of anticipatory
bail by this Court vide order dated 28.02.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc No. 13827 of 2025 respectively.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, petitioners have
clean antecedent and similarly situated co-accused persons have
been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court or by
different Coordinate Benches of this Hon’ble Court, let the
petitioners, above named, in the event of their 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)each with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
A.C.J.M.-IV, Samastipur in connection with Mohiuddinagar
P.S.Case No.142 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and
with other following conditions:-
(I) Petitioners shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43428 of 2026(2) dt.09-07-2026
4/4
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.