Patna High Court
Pradip Kumar @ Pradip GuptaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner on the condition of a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to specified conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Pradip Kumar, was arrested on 28 July 2025 in connection with a police case alleging that he assaulted the husband of an informant, inflicting a head injury with a spade. The prosecution charged him under several sections of the B.N.S., including offences relating to assault, rioting, and criminal intimidation. The petitioner pleaded that he has a clean antecedent, was falsely implicated, and that the injuries were minor, caused by a blunt object, creating a case and counter‑case scenario. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the direct allegation of assault and the injury sustained by the victim. Considering the petitioner’s clean record, the nature of the injury, and the existence of a case‑and‑counter‑case, the court granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, presence in court, and non‑tampering with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the assault allegations
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the minor nature of the injury justify bail
- Whether there is a risk of the petitioner tampering with evidence or witnesses
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- bail
- assault
- criminal antecedent
- injury
- case and counter case
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76988 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2025 Thana- BHAPTIAHI District- Supaul
======================================================
Pradip Kumar @ Pradip Gupta S/O Ravi Shankar Sah @ Ravi Shankar Gupta
R/O Village- Pipra Khurd, Ward No. 02, P.S- Bhaptiyahi, Distt.- Supaul.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Satish Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Arun, Advocate
Md. Anwar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Satish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner, Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State and Mr. Arun, learned Advocate
for the Informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
28.07.2025 in connection with Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No. 165 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 20.07.2025 for the offences punishable under
Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 303(2), 351(2), 352, 115(2), 109
of the B.N.S.
3. According to prosecution case, petitioner and other
accused persons are alleged to have surrounded the informant’s
husband and assaulted him. Petitioner is said to have given
spade blow over his head as a result he became unconscious and
fell down.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76988 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. Although, the specific allegation
of assault is attributed against the petitioner that he has assaulted
the husband of the informant and husband of the informant has
received the injury but the injury report of the injured persons
suggests that the injuries are simple in nature caused by hard
and blunt substance. There is case and counter case. He further
submits that the police after investigation, submitted
chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody
since 28.07.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of
the petitioner and submits that there is direct allegation of
assault is attributed against the petitioner and the injured
persons have received the injury.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
petitioner has clean antecedent and there is case and counter
case and the injury inflicted upon the informant’s husband found
to be simple in nature, let the petitioner, above named, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76988 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/3
satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in
connection with Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No. 165 of 2025, with the
following conditions:
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers 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 petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. 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)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…