Patna High Court
Prince KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to a Rs 10,000 bail bond each and specified conditions, including payment of Rs 5,000 to the informant.
Summary
Prince Kumar and his father Vinod Singh sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case registered under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita for alleged assault, robbery and related offences. The prosecution alleged that Prince Kumar, while intoxicated, assaulted the informant and snatched money, causing injuries to the informant’s hand and leg. The petitioners contended that only a minor scuffle occurred, the injuries were simple, and they were prepared to pay Rs 5,000 to the informant as compensation. The court noted the existence of a case‑and‑counter‑case, the simple nature of the injuries, and the petitioners’ willingness to compensate, and therefore granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs 10,000 each and several conditions, including monthly police attendance and non‑interference with witnesses. The order also required the payment of Rs 5,000 to the informant via demand draft at the time of bail bond execution.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners despite the serious charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the nature of the alleged injuries and the petitioners’ willingness to compensate justify the grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115, 118, 126, 303, 351, 352
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- assault
- theft
- simple injuries
- bail conditions
- case and counter case
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90565 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-200 Year-2025 Thana- MALI District- Aurangabad
======================================================
1. Prince Kumar S/o Vinod Singh Resident of Village- Jitpur, P.O.- Jaihind
Tendua, Nabinagar, P.S.- Mali, District- Aurangabad, Bihar, 824301
2. Vinod Singh S/o Bindeshwari Singh Resident of Village- Jitpur, P.O.-
Jaihind Tendua, Nabinagar, P.S.- Mali, District- Aurangabad, Bihar, 824301
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dayanand Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard Mr. Dayanand Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioners and learned APP representing the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Mali P.S. Case No. 200 of 2025 registered for
the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352,
351(2), 351(3) and 303(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
lodged on 19.10.2025 by the informant, Manoj Singh.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that in an inebriated state, the petitioner no.1, Prince Kumar
wanted payment of sprite and upon refusal, allegation is of
assaulting causing injuries on his hand and leg. Allegation of
snatching money is also there, he was taken to Nabinagar
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90565 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
Referral Hospital which followed the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that a
minor scuffle took place, there is case and counter case, both the
father and son have been implicated in the present matter.
Further submission is that the injuries have been found to be
simple in nature and last submission is that without accepting
the allegation or outcome of the present petition, the petitioner
no.1, Prince Kumar intends to pay Rs.5,000/- to the informant
towards treatment by Demand Draft issued by the local branch
of the State Bank of India/any Nationalized Bank to be
submitted at the time of execution of bail bond.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that as
per the allegation, the petitioner no.1, Prince Kumar was in
inebriated state.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
that there is case and counter case, both the petitioners are father
and son, the injuries have been found to be simple in nature, in
that background, this Court is inclined to extend them the
privilege of anticipatory bail subject to payment of Rs.5,000/- to
the informant by the petitioner no.1, Prince Kumar as
undertaken by the learned counsel for the petitioners through
Demand Draft issued by the local branch of the State Bank of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90565 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
India/any Nationalized Bank to be submitted at the time of
execution of the bail bond and the same shall be handed over to
the informant after checking his/her credentials.
7. Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event
of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class,
Aurangabad, in connection with Mali P.S. Case No. 200 of
2025 subject to the following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to
show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioners shall appear before the concerned
police station every month for next six months to mark their
attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be submitted
before the Trial Court failing which the State shall be at liberty
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90565 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;
(iv) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioners shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…