Patna High Court
Vicky KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to conditions, finding no specific case against them and noting their clean antecedent.
Summary
The petitioners, Vicky Kumar and Rinku Devi, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Sahajitpur PS Case No.124 of 2026) involving alleged assault, theft and other offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution’s FIR alleged that the petitioners, along with others, assaulted a shopkeeper and his brother and stole Rs.5,000. The petitioners contended that the allegations were vague, the injuries were simple, and they had no prior criminal record. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the lack of specific charges against the petitioners, the minor nature of the injuries, and their clean antecedent. Accordingly, the court exercised its power under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to grant anticipatory bail with strict conditions. The bail order required a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions on appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and refraining from further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners despite the FIR alleging multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
- Whether the general and omnibus nature of the allegations, simple injuries, and clean antecedent justify the grant of bail under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 B.N.S.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2)
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 B.N.S.
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- assault
- theft
- clean antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44710 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2026 Thana- SAHAJITPUR District- Saran
======================================================
1. Vicky Kumar Son of Yogendra Sah Resident of village- Sisai, Po and Ps-
Sahajitpur, Dist- Saran at Chapra
2. Rinku Devi wife of Yogendra Sah Resident of village- Sisai, Po and Ps-
Sahajitpur, Dist- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 08-07-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Sahajitpur P.S. Case No.124 of 2026, F.I.R
dated 30.04.2026 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, in brief, is that the
informant, Ranjan Kumar, lodged a written report at Sahajitpur
Police Station on 30.04.2026 alleging that on 29.04.2026, at
about 6:00 p.m., while he was closing his shop due to a
thunderstorm, the accused persons, Vicky Kumar, Anshu
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44710 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
2/4
Kumar, Yogendra Sah, Rinku Devi, Kajal Kumari, and Anchal
Kumari, arrived, accused him of theft, abused and assaulted him
with lathis and rods, causing injuries. When the informant's
brother intervened to rescue him, he was also assaulted and
sustained injuries. It is further alleged that the accused persons
took Rs.5,000 from the cash box of the shop.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
there is no specific allegation against the petitioners rather the
allegations are general and omnibus in nature. It has next been
submitted that for a petty dispute between the agnates, the
incident is said to have taken place and in the course of said
altercation, the injury is said to have been sustained, which on
examination by the treating Doctor, has been found to be simple
in nature, which fact has been submitted by the petitioner by
referring to the observations made in the impugned order.
Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioners are innocent
and have no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
that due to altercation, both the parties have sustained injuries,
which are found to be simple in nature and there is no specific
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44710 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
3/4
allegation against the petitioners rather the allegations are
general and omnibus in nature and the petitioners have clean
antecedent. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners.
7. 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)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Saran at Chapra, in
connection with Sahajitpur 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44710 of 2026(2) dt.08-07-2026
4/4
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)
sharun/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.