Patna High Court
Amarnath Singh @ Amarjit SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioner, Amarnath Singh, sought bail in a murder case (Complaint No. 2598 of 2018) alleging offences under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with co‑accused, killed the complainant's son by running him over with a tractor, while the petitioner claimed he was not present at the scene and was falsely implicated. The defence highlighted the delay in filing the complaint, lack of motive, the petitioner’s absence from the state at the time, and his inability to drive the tractor. The court found the allegations vague and considered the prolonged custody, granting bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and imposing conditions under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. The bail order required a close relative as a bailor, regular court appearances, and cancellation upon non‑compliance.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused of murder under Sections 302 and 34 IPC given the facts.
- Whether the delay in filing the complaint and absence of a clear motive affect the bail decision.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged non‑presence at the scene and lack of driving skill negate the prosecution’s case.
- Application of Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. in granting bail with conditions.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 480(3)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- Section 302 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
- delay in filing
- false implication
- B.N.S.S. Section 480(3)
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8985 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2598 Year-2018 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE
District- Vaishali
======================================================
Amarnath Singh @ Amarjit Singh Son of Ranjeet Singh Resident of village-
Paschim Raghopur, P.S-Judabanpur,Distt-Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Complaint Case No. 2598 of 2018 registered
for the alleged offences under Section 302/34 of the Indian
Penal Code.
03. As per prosecution case, the petitioner and other
co-accused persons murdered the son of the complainant.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
case. The petitioner was not even present at the place of
occurrence as he had gone outside the State. The allegation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8985 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
2/3
against the petitioner is not believable that he, on saying of co-
accused Ranjit Singh, ran the son of the informant over by his
tractor. The complaint has also been filed after much delay. The
occurrence is stated to have taken place on 27.08.2018 but the
present complaint case was filed on 15.09.2018 and there is no
satisfactory explanation in the complaint petition. No motive
has been assigned for the alleged occurrence. The petitioner
does not know to drive and tractor in question does not belong
to this petitioner. The petitioner is having antecedent of two
cases and in both the cases he is on bail. The petitioner is in
custody since 26.11.2025.
05. Learned APP opposes the submission made on
behalf of the petitioner. Learned APP submits that the petitioner
and other co-accused persons have been specifically named as
the persons who caused death of the son of the complainant.
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
vague nature of allegation and period of custody of the
petitioner, the petitioner above named is directed to be released
on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned C.J.M.-IV, Vaishali at Hajipur/concerned Court in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8985 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026
3/3
connection with Complaint Case No. 2598 of 2018, subject to
the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of B.N.S.S. and also
the following conditions:
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative
of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on
each and every date fixed by the court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive
dates or in violation of the terms of the bail,
the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable
to be cancelled by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
DKS/-
U T
Checking your session…