Amarnath Singh @ Amarjit Singh v. The State Of Bihar

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 villagePaschim 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 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 coaccused 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