Deepak Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3873 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-409 Year-2025 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== 1.
Deepak Kumar S/o Vidya Nand Yadav R/o Village- Hardi Purab Tola Ajan, Ward No 2, PS- Supaul, Distt- Supaul 2.
Bablu Kumar @ Babaloo Kumar S/o Late Dukhi Yadav @ Dukhi Lal Yadav R/o Village- Hardi Purab Tola Ajan, Ward No 2, PS- Supaul, Distt- Supaul 3.
Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Kumar Yadav @ Tintu S/o Ram Sevak Yadav R/o Village- Hardi Purab Tola Ajan, Ward No 2, PS- Supaul, Distt- Supaul 4.
Chhotelal Yadav S/o Dukhilal Yadav @ Dukhi Lal Yadav R/o Village- Hardi Purab Tola Ajan, Ward No 2, PS- Supaul, Distt- Supaul 5.
Ram Shevak Yadav S/o Late Gosay Yadav R/o Village- Hardi Purab Tola Ajan, Ward No 2, PS- Supaul, Distt- Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prakash Chandra Jha, Smt Kumari Anjali, Advocates.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Binod Kumar, Adv.
For the informant :
Mr. Kamal Kishore Singh, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026 Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
2. This application for grant of anticipatory bail arises out of Supaul Police Station Case No. 409 of 2025 dated 07.08.2025, disclosing the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 3(5) of the BNS lodged by the informant, Rina Kumari.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant alleged that while she and her husband, Manoj Kumar were sitting in
2/4 their veranda, all the FIR named accused persons including these petitioners came armed variously and her husband was assaulted with iron rod on his head by petitioner no.3, Suraj Kumar @ Suraj Kumar Yadav @ Tintu and, as alleged, all of her family members were assaulted by means of Lathi etc., Accordingly, the present FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and they have falsely been implicated in this case only on the basis of old enmity. He further submits that the nature of injuries which is said to have been sustained by the family members of the informant do not corroborate the allegations as alleged in the FIR and these petitioners have got clean antecedents and it is further submitted that they are agnates and there is a case and counter case between the parties for the same occurrence, which has been lodged by the petitioner no. 3 against the husband of the informant and others bearing Supaul PS Case No. 411/2025. However, the petitioners further undertake not to get indulge in future in such kind of allegation and, in case, such allegations are being levelled against them in future, the informant and the police will be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their anticipatory bail.
3/4
5. On the other hand, learned APP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but concedes that the parties are agnates and there is a case and counter case.
6. Considering the fact that the nature of injuries which is said to have been sustained by the family members of the informant do not corroborated the allegations as alleged in the FIR, there is case and counter case between the parties and the petitioners have got clean antecedent, this Court is inclined to grant the petitioners the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. This application for anticipatory bail is, accordingly, allowed.
8. Let the petitioners, named above, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within six weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in connection with aforesaid Police Station Case subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S. 2023, as well as the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
4/4 (ii) the petitioner(s) 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 his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) 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 (iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his/her bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J) perwez U T