Vikram Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21788 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2024 Thana- KUDHNI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Vikram Kumar, aged about 31 years, Male, Son of Nagendra Singh, Resident of Village- Kishunpur Madhuban, P.S.- Kudhani, Distt.- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP For the informant :

Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-04-2025 Heard Mr. Rana Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner; Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, learned APP for the State and Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Kudhani P.S. Case No. 216 of 2024 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 126(2),115(2),118(1),109,303(2),352,351(2),351(3),3(5) of BNS.

3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the accused persons named therein including the petitioner had assaulted the informant. Specific allegation of assaulting the informant by means of Farsa on his head is against petitioner, as a result of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21788 of 2025(2) dt.23-04-2025 2/2 which, the informant sustained injury.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Petitioner has clean antecedent.

5. Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. He submitted that petitioner is the one, who had assaulted the informant by means of Farsa on his head, resulting into grievous injury.

5. Learned APP for the State too vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

6. Having considered the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as the nature of allegation made against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the present bail application stands dismissed.

(Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T