Prabhat Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9672 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-399 Year-2025 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.
Prabhat Kumar, Son of Randhir Kumar R/o Village - Dakshsni, P.S. - Kako(Bhelwar), Dist. - Jehanabad(Bihar).
2.
Jayveer Kumar, Son of Sudhir Yadav R/o Village - Dakshsni, P.S. - Kako(Bhelwar), Dist. - Jehanabad(Bihar).
3.
Sanyoga Devi @ Sayoga Devi, Wife of Sudhir Yadav R/o Village - Dakshsni, P.S. - Kako(Bhelwar), Dist. - Jehanabad(Bihar). 4.
Premveer Kumar, Son of Sudhir Yadav R/o Village - Dakshsni, P.S. - Kako(Bhelwar), Dist. - Jehanabad(Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Kako (Bhalawar) P.S. Case No.399 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 109(1), 74, 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that they have all assaulted the informant and his mother-in-law. It is alleged that the mother-in-law of the informant sustained a
2/4 fracture, while several injuries were also sustained by the informant and others.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case and no such occurrence as alleged had occurred. It has further been submitted that for the same incident there is a counter case lodged on behalf of the petitioner No.3. It has next been submitted that on account of the intervention of the well-wisher, the parties have entered into a compromise and a petition to such effect has been filed before the learned Trial court on 25.11.2025. It has also been submitted that the petitioners and the informant's sides are agnates. It has lastly been submitted that petitioner nos.1 and 4 have clean antecedents and petitioner nos.2 and 3 have one criminal case against their names.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioners above named be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the
3/4 like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Kako (Bhalawar) P.S. Case No.399 of 2025, subject to the condition that the learned Trial Court shall accept the bail bond after confirming the fact of compromise from the informant and further conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their close relative.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioners are found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of their bail bond. (v) The learned Court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the abovementioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
4/4
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial. (Sourendra Pandey, J) manoj/- U T