Nikhil Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8359 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2025 Thana- Paura District- Khagaria ====================================================== 1.
Nikhil Kumar Son of Nageshwar Singh @ Nago Singh All are Resident of Kanhauli, P.S. - Paura, District - Khagaria.
2.
Nageshwar Singh @ Nago Singh Son of Late Ramrup Singh All are Resident of Kanhauli, P.S. - Paura, District - Khagaria. 3.
Indu Devi W/o Nageshwar Singh @ Nago Singh All are Resident of Kanhauli, P.S. - Paura, District - Khagaria.
4.
Fulo Kumari @ Phul Kumari D/o Nageshwar Singh @ Nago Singh All are Resident of Kanhauli, P.S. - Paura, District - Khagaria. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Amar Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Paura P.S. Case No. 47 of 2025 dated 22.10.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 80 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that his sister was married with Gyandev Singh in the year 2022 and thereafter, the entire family had been demanding
2/4 motorcycle and cash and for non fulfillment of the same, the accused persons killed the sister of the informant.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are the father-in-law, mother-in-law, devar and nanad of the deceased. It has also been submitted that there is mere suspicion raised against all the petitioners that they have killed the deceased but from perusal of the Post-mortem report, it would be evident that the cause of death is stated to be asphyxia due to hanging. It has also been submitted that there is no specific allegation of overt act against these petitioners and subsequently, the informant has realized his mistake and had also filed a compromise in the present matter. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioners have clean antecedent.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the parties and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioners above named, are directed to be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the
3/4 satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Paura P.S. Case No. 47 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of BNSS as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned. (iv) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents, the trial court shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
4/4 in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) Gautam/- U T