Patna High Court
Niraj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and surety conditions, under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Niraj Kumar, an 18‑year‑old with a clean record, was implicated in an assault case arising from a dispute over a passage, with the FIR alleging his participation in multiple assaults. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the injuries were simple, he was falsely implicated, and his detention would jeopardise his future. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences listed under the BNS. The court considered the petitioner's age, the nature of the alleged injuries, and his willingness to cooperate, and ordered that he be released on anticipatory bail if arrested within six weeks, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties. One surety was to be his brother, Dheeraj Kumar, and the bail was conditioned under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in view of the allegations under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
- Whether the petitioner’s age, clean antecedent and the nature of alleged injuries justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438
- Criminal Procedure Code
- assault
- minor
- bail conditions
- BNSS
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86378 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-178 Year-2025 Thana- PARAIYA District- Gaya
======================================================
Niraj Kumar Son of Ramashish Yadav R/o Village - Tadma P.S. - Paraiya
District - Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prithivi Raj Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Harendra Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 1. 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 126(2),
115(2), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and is a young boy,
aged about 18 years and the informant alleges that on
13.05.2025, at 08:30 a.m., on account of dispute relating to
passage, the accused persons including the petitioner came and
assaulted him by lathi causing injury on his head, thereafter
Vikash and Subhash assaulted the wife of the informant by lathi
on her body. Further, petitioner and Khusbu assaulted the
brother of the informant, namely, Mahesh by rod and lathi
causing injury on his head and lips, thereafter Manoj and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86378 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/3
Rakesh assaulted Surendra by rod causing injury on his head
and above the right eye, thereafter Vikash threatened with pistol
and desisted the villagers to help. Further, Subhash assaulted
Mutur Devi by rod causing injury on her head and Jai Prakash
along with Ramlakhan assaulted Ranju Devi and Khusbu
snatched the chain of the wife of the informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in
the instant case by the informant. It is further submitted that
from perusal of the allegation, as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that on account of dispute relating to passage, the
occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It is next submitted
that on account of the said dispute, an altercation took place in
which both sides assaulted each other and the petitioner is
alleged to have assaulted Mahesh with rod causing injury on
head along with Khusbu. It is also submitted that from perusal
of the injury report of Mahesh, annexed as Annexure-2 to the
anticipatory bail application, it would manifest that the injury
has been opined to be simple in nature and the blow is not
alleged to have been repeated. It is further submitted that
petitioner is a young body aged about about 18 years and if he is
sent to judicial custody, his entire career would get jeopardized
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86378 of 2025(2) dt.04-02-2026
3/3
and chances are bright that he may come in contact with the
hardened criminals. It is next submitted that petitioner will not
abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his
innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case
is pending/Successor Court in connection with Paraiya P.S. Case
No. 178 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the BNSS.
7. One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
brother, namely, Dheeraj Kumar.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…