Uman KamatversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66938 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2025 Thana- KISHANPUR District- Supaul
                 ======================================================
           1.     Uman Kamat S/o- Late Mantu Kamat Tharbitta, ward no- 8, Kishanpur,
                  Dist- Supaul
           2.    Gunanand Kamat S/o- Uman Kamat Tharbitta, ward no- 8, Kishanpur, Dist-
                 Supaul
           3.    Shivnandan Kumar @ Shivanand Kumar S/o- Gunanand Kamat Tharbitta,
                 ward no- 8, Kishanpur, Dist- Supaul

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Ranjay Kumar Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Anuj Kumar Shrivastava
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   10-02-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),

                   115(2), 118(1), 303(2), 109 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023 read with

                   Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

                   petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that on account of dispute relating to land, Bajrangi

                   Kamat assaulted him by farsa causing injury while Gunanand

                   Kamat (petitioner no. 2) assaulted the informant by Kudal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66938 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2026
                                            2/4




          causing injury on head and Sunita assaulted by bricks on his

          chest, thereafter accused persons also assaulted his father while

          Shivanandan (petitioner no. 3) fired but missed, thereafter Uman

          (petitioner no. 1) and Sukhdev also assaulted him by brick and

          stone, further Rubi Devi threw bricks on head while Neelam

          assaulted his uncle by brick, thereafter Yashoda assaulted his

          brother by brick and threw chilly powder in his eyes.

                   4.     Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

          petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by

          the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the

          allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that specific

          allegation of assault is against Bajrangi and Gunanand. It is also

          submitted that though Shivnandan is alleged to have fired but no

          one was injured as such the said allegation has been alleged

          only to give seriousness to the case and as far as petitioner no. 1

          (Uman) is concerned, he is a senior citizen aged about 76 years

          and came to be implicated with an allegation that he along with

          Sukhdev assaulted the informant by brick and stone. It is further

          submitted that entire family members came to be implicated on

          account of dispute relating to land.

                   5.     Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that from perusal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66938 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2026
                                            3/4




          of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that

          Bajrangi and Gunanand are alleged to have assaulted the

          informant, but then Gunanad is alleged to have assaulted the

          informant by kudal on head causing injury. It is next submitted

          that Bajrangi had approached this Court seeking anticipatory

          bail by filing Cr. Misc No. 54559 of 2025 and the same came to

          be allowed by an order dated 27-8-2025. It is further submitted

          that from perusal of the order dated 27-8-2025 in Cr. Misc NO.

          54559 of 2025, it would manifest that the injury suffered on

          account of assault by Gunanand on head has been opined to be

          grievous in nature, but then fairly submits that allegation against

          the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 appears to be general, omnibus and

          ornamental in nature.

                   6.     After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,

          the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory

          bail to the petitioner no. 2 (Gunanand Kamat).

                   7.      Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the

          petitioner no. 2 is rejected.

                   8.     However the petitioner nos. 1 and 3, in the event of

          their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today,

          be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.

          10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66938 of 2025(2) dt.10-02-2026
                                                          4/4




                        like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court

                        where the case is pending/successor court in connection with

                        Kishunpur P.S. Case No. 37 of 2025, subject to the conditions as

                        laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS.

                                 9.     Accordingly,         the     instant   anticipatory   bail

                        application is partly allowed.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T