Patna High Court
Aditya Kumar @ Vishal KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioners, holding that their presence facilitated the alleged stabbing and thus they are not entitled to bail.
Summary
The petitioners, three brothers from Terasiya, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS No.152 of 2025) involving alleged extortion, assault and stabbing under several sections of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023. They argued they have clean records and were falsely implicated by the informant, who claimed they demanded Rs.50,000 per month and were present during the assault but did not personally stab the victim. The State contended that although the petitioners did not wield the knife, their presence encouraged the assailant, Santosh, to commit the stabbing, and therefore bail should not be granted. The court examined the allegations, noting the injury was simple yet an incised wound corroborated the stabbing claim, and found the petitioners' involvement sufficient to deny anticipatory bail. Consequently, the court rejected the anticipatory bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 in view of the alleged extortion and assault.
- Whether the mere presence of the petitioners at the scene, without directly committing the stabbing, warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- extortion
- assault
- stabbing
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- criminal procedure
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86976 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-152 Year-2025 Thana- GANGABRIDGE District- Vaishali
======================================================
1. Aditya Kumar @ Vishal Kumar S/O Shankar Rai Resident of village-
Terasiya, P.S- Ganga Bridge, Distirct - Vaishali
2. Raushan Kumar S/O Shankar Rai Resident of village- Terasiya, P.S- Ganga
Bridge, Distirct - Vaishali
3. Ajay Kumar S/O Chanarik Rai Resident of village- Terasiya, P.S- Ganga
Bridge, Distirct - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhola Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 27-02-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Ganga Bridge P.S. Case No. 152 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2),
352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that on 10.09.2025 at 05:00 PM, he was returning home
when accused persons including the petitioners intercepted him
and demanded extortion of Rs. 50,000/- per month, on protest,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86976 of 2025(2) dt.27-02-2026
2/3
Raushan gave orders to kill, on which Santosh assaulted him by
knife causing injury on head while Ajay assaulted by rod
causing injury on shoulder, further on instigation of Raushan
and Aditya, accused Santosh again assaulted him by knife at the
same place causing injury on head while Aditya took Rs.
16,000/- from his pocket and when people gathered, accused
fled threatening.
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
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that Santosh
is alleged to have stabbed twice the informant causing injury on
head, but then as far as these petitioners are concerned, they are
not alleged to have assaulted the informant by knife, rather it is
alleged that Ajay (petitioner no. 3) assaulted by rod and on
instigation of Aditya and Raushan, the accused Santosh had
stabbed the informant for the second time and Aditya is also
alleged to have snatched Rs. 16,000/-. It is also submitted that
the injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple
in nature.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
anticipatory bail application of the petitioners and submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86976 of 2025(2) dt.27-02-2026
3/3
no doubt injury has been opined to be simple in nature, but then
the wound is incised, which corroborates the allegation of
stabbing. It is next submitted that no doubt petitioners are not
alleged to have stabbed the informant, but then their presence at
the place of occurrence emboldened Santosh to commit the
occurrence of stabbing.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the
privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…