Vipul Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10488 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-139 Year-2025 Thana- MAHARAJGANJ District- Siwan ====================================================== Vipul Singh S/o Sri Nagendra Singh @ Harendra Singh R/o Village- Bangra, P.S.- Maharajganj, District- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Counsel for the informant and Learned APP for the State.

2. The present criminal miscellaneous application has been filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as 'the BNSS, 2023') for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner who apprehends arrest in connection with Maharajganj P.S. Case No. 139 of 2025, lodged on 19.03.2025, under Sections 126(2)/115(2) /118(1) / 109/303(2)/352/351(2)/3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Siwan.

3. As per the prosecution, allegation has been levelled in the FIR against the petitioner that he has assaulted the informant due to which fracture took place.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10488 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/2 petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that there is one criminal antecedent against the petitioner in which he is on bail. Counsel further submits that the entire allegation is false. They are co-villager and petitioner has unnecessarily been made accused in this case. Counsel further submits that he ready to fulfill all the conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon him.

5. Learned Counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that in the FIR itself it has been alleged that when the informant opposes from selling the wine, then the informant who is 50% disabled was subjected to injury by the petitioner. The injury is grievous in nature.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from the rejection order it is clear that injury is serious in nature.

7. Considering the allegation and nature of injury, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby refused. (Dr. Anshuman, J) Mkr./- U T