Amarjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22559 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2025 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur ====================================================== Amarjeet Kumar Son of Late Lakhan Mahto Resident of Village - Mohanpur, Ps- Bibhutipur, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Pratik, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 08-05-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State, Mr. Rabindra Kumar.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 74, 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case, as would manifest from the supplementary affidavit and the informant alleges that Roshan was apprehended in a case of liquor and is in custody, further on 03.02.2025, 10 named accused persons including the petitioner along with 5-7 unknown accused intercepted the informant near the house of Yadunandan at 07:30 PM and Sanjit along with petitioner gave orders to kill, on the pretext that

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22559 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026 2/3 because of the informant, Roshan was sent to judicial custody, thereafter Amit assaulted the informant by an iron rod causing injury on head, thereafter Amarjit assaulted Avinash by rod causing injury on head and Sumit assaulted Ram Pukar, a differently abled person, by rod causing injury on head and thereafter all accused assaulted Ram Pukar and Satya Devi along with Sumitra snatched her earring and chain.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that petitioner is alleged to have assaulted Avinash by rod causing injury on head, but then the blow is not alleged to be repeated and the injury has been opined to be simple in nature. It is further submitted that petitioner and the informant are agnates and are having land dispute, as such, it appears that petitioner also came to be implicated in the instant case. It is also submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted, petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22559 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026 3/3

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rosera, Samastipur in connection with Bibhutipur P. S. Case No. 53 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

7. The application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T