Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10287 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-320 Year-2025 Thana- BIKRAMGANJ District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.

Vivek Kumar @ Vivek Singh, aged about 21 years (Male), S/o Vinod Singh 2.

Dhanji Singh @ Dhanji Kumar Singh, aged about 33 years (male), S/o Rajendra Singh, R/o Village- Indrath Khurd, PS- Bikramganj, DisttRohtas ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ramashray Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 11-05-2026 Heard Mr. Ramashray Roy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 320 of 2025 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352 and 3(5) of the BNS.

3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the accused persons named therein including the petitioners assaulted the informant and his family members, with an intention to kill, causing injuries.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

2/5 petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated the present case. Petitioner no.1 is 21 years old and he is a student, whereas petitioner no.2 is 33 years old and allegation against them is that they along with other coaccused persons assaulted the informant and his family members, in which allegedly informant sustained grievous injuries and other victims sustained simple injury. Allegation is general and omnibus and it cannot be said that the petitioners had assaulted the informant or other victim persons. Petitioners have clean antecedents. On these grounds, petitioners seek to be released on pre-arrest bail.

5. Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in the FIR and the material which has come in the case diary, I find that there is minuscule evidence against petitioner no.1, 21 years old, who is a student, that he had actively participated in the alleged incidence in which informant and other persons received injury. The petitioner no.1, above named, is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of

3/5 four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st, Bikramganj, Rohtas / Concerned Court in connection with Bikramganj P.S. Case No. 320/2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

7. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner no.1 and if it is found that the petitioner no.1 is involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will automatically lose its force with respect to the petitioner no.1.

8. So far as petitioner no. 2 is concerned, previous enmity between him and the informant is not denied. Both parties are co-villagers. The learned District Court is directed to first issue notice to the informant and also to the petitioner and see whether there is any possibility of any compromise between the parties. In case, he finds that there is possibility of compromise in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in case of Naushey Ali vs. State of U.P., reported in, (2025) 4 SCC 78 then in that case, he will refer the matter before the learned Mediator of the District Mediation Centre under the

4/5 provision of Mediation Act, 2023 by fixing a date for appearance of the parties to give effect to "Mediation for the Nation 2.0".

9. Thereafter, learned Mediator of the District Mediation Center concerned shall make his/her best efforts to settle the dispute amicably and submit his/her report before the concerned learned District Court, well within a period of three months, till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioner no.2 in connection with the aforesaid case.

10. In case, the parties resolve their dispute amicably or arrive at a mutual settlement, in light of the law laid down by the Apex Court as referred above, the petitioner no.2 is required to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.

11. In case of failure on the part of the petitioner no.2 to appear on the date fixed before the learned District Court or any date fixed by the learned Mediator, the interim protection granted to the petitioner no.2 shall automatically lose its force.

12. In case, it is deliberate on the part of the informant to reconcile, then in that case, the interim protection granted to the petitioner no.2 shall continue and the trial shall proceed in accordance with law.

5/5

13. In case, the parties fail to reconcile, then in that case, parties may avail appropriate remedy. Then also, petitioner no.2 is directed to be released on pre-arrest bail on such terms and conditions as the learned District Court deems it fit and proper.

14. The bail application stands disposed of.

15. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Member Secretary, Bihar State Legal Services Authority and the Patna High Court Mediation Centre for the purpose of record. (Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T