Patna High Court
Tuntun Kumar @ Tuntun YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Tuntun Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged three days after an alleged assault on a neighbour over a drain dispute, resulting in non‑grievous injuries. The FIR listed offences under several IPC sections, but the petitioner argued the delay in filing and the existence of a counter‑case indicated a petty, spontaneous fight. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations. The Court considered the delay, the nature of injuries, and the mutual disputes, and granted anticipatory bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, including a relative as bailor and cooperation with investigation. The order directs surrender within four weeks and allows cancellation for non‑cooperation.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite the FIR alleging multiple IPC offences.
- Whether the three‑day delay in lodging the FIR and the non‑grievous nature of injuries justify bail.
- Whether conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS 2023 are appropriate.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- delay in FIR
- neighbour dispute
- IPC offences
- bail conditions
- CrPC
- BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.57864 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-362 Year-2023 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura
======================================================
Tuntun Kumar @ Tuntun Yadav S/o Jagdish Yadav R/o Village- Tamout
Parsa, P.S.- Murliganj, District- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Advocate
: Ms. Laxmi Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Kanhiya Kishor, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323,
324, 379, 307, 354(A), 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. The allegation in the First Information Report is
of assaulting the informant and others causing injuries to them.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits at the
outset that the First Information Report has been lodged after a
delay of three days inasmuch as, while the occurrence had taken
place on 30.08.2023, the F.I.R. was lodged on 02.09.2023 for
which no explanation has been tendered. Further, there is case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57864 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
and counter case between the parties, the case lodged from the
petitioner’s side being Murliganj P.S. Case No.72 of 2023. So
far as the allegation pertaining to the petitioner is concerned, it
is stated that he had given a Khanti blow on the head of the
informant, the injury report, which is a part of the case diary,
indicates a lacerated wound with soft tissue swelling of scalp
and the injury has not been indicated to be grievous in nature. It
is submitted that the dispute had taken place at the spur of the
moment on a petty issue of flowing of drain and with regard to
the same a free fight took place between the parties, who are
neighbours.
5. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for
anticipatory bail on the basis of allegations made in the First
Information Report.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances and considering the factum of delay in lodging
the F.I.R., coupled with the fact that there is case and counter
case between the parties and serious injuries not being caused to
the informant and the injured Vinod Kumar, let the above named
petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four
weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.57864 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the
case is pending/successor Court in connection with Murliganj
P.S. Case No. 362 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C/ Section 482 (2) of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, subject to
further condition(s):
“(i) One of the bailors will be his own blood
relative, preferably, father, mother, brother,
sister and/or his wife.
(ii) The petitioner shall co-operate with the
investigation, if not already concluded and
make himself available as and when so
required, failing which the prosecution will be
at liberty to move cancellation of his bail
bond.”
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
anand/-
U T
Checking your session…