Patna High Court
Amarjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner at this stage.
Summary
Amarjeet Kumar applied for bail in a case (Kharik PS Case No. 265 of 2024) alleging offences under Sections 105 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 15(2) of the Indian Medical Act, relating to the death of a patient during surgery at an illegal medical centre. The prosecution contends that the petitioner performed the operation despite not being a registered medical practitioner, leading to the victim's death. The petitioner argued that he is not named in the FIR, was implicated only through a co‑accused’s confessional statement, has no criminal antecedents, and is neither a doctor nor a nurse. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged offences and the petitioner’s alleged involvement. The High Court, after considering the material, refused bail, directed the trial court to expedite the trial, and allowed the petitioner to renew the bail application after four months if the trial remains pending.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Indian Medical Act.
- Whether the evidence, primarily a co‑accused’s confessional statement and the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR, is sufficient to justify bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged performance of surgery without being a registered medical practitioner attracts liability under the Indian Medical Act.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 105, 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- medical negligence
- illegal medical practice
- Indian Medical Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- anticipatory bail
- trial expediting
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86549 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2024 Thana- KHARIK District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Amarjeet Kumar Son of Binay Kumar Resident of Village- Pansalwa, P.S.-
Beldaur, District- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kharik
P.S. Case No. 265 of 2024 instituted for the offence under
Sections 105, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and
15(2) of the Indian Medical Act.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that informant
alleged that his mother died during an operation at an illegal
medical centre in Bhagalpur on 09.11.2024. The centre had
taken Rs. 35,000/- for the surgery, and his mother died during
the procedure, after which police conducted a post-mortem and
registered the case.
4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86549 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
that the petitioner is in custody since 20.10.2025. Petitioner
bears no criminal antecedents, as per disclosure made in
paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.
5. It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s
counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present
case. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner
has surfaced on the basis of the confessional statement of the
co-accused. There is no specific allegation against the petitioner.
Petitioner is neither the Doctor nor the Nurse of the hospital in
question. There is no independent witness of the prosecution
case. Charge sheet has already been submitted in this case.
Other co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 27-08-2025,
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 55938 of 2025.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner stating that
as per the material available in the case diary, this petitioner is
not a registered medical practitioner and in spite of the same, he
had performed the operation of the informant’s mother and due
to which she died. Learned APP therefore, prays that petitioner
does not deserve to be released on bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86549 of 2025(3) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
of the case, nature and gravity of offence as also the material
against the petitioner in the case diary, this Court is not inclined
to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the
petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
9. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew
the prayer for grant of bail before the Trial Court if the trial is
not concluded within a period of four months from today.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…