Vikash Kumar Singh @ Vikash Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24195 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2025 Thana- DHARHARA District- Munger ====================================================== 1.

Vikash Kumar Singh @ Vikash Singh S/o Shankar Singh Resident of village- Bhalar, P.S.- Dharahra, District- Munger 2.

Amit Raj @ Dhurka @ Amit Singh S/o Ram Padarath Singh Resident of village- Bhalar, P.S.- Dharahra, District- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Kumar Kamal Nayan For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Satya Nand Shukla ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 22-04-2026

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Dharhara Police Station Case No. 173 of 2025, dated 01.10.2025, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 126(2)/115(2)/117(2)/109/329(3)/352/351(2)/3

(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. The prosecution case, as per the First Information Report, is that the petitioners, along with others, entered into the house of the informant and started abusing him. When the father of the informant objected, the petitioners, along with others, assaulted him by lathi on his right hand, due

2/4 to which he sustained fracture injury in his right hand. When the informant and his sister tried to save him, all the accused persons assaulted them also, due to which the informant sustained injuries in both of his legs and on chest.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case due to previous enmity. Both the parties are co-villagers. He further submits that there is no specific allegation against the accused persons and only general and omnibus allegations are there in the First Information Report. He next submits that the victim has sustained injury on the non-vital part of his body.

5. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that the victim has sustained grievous injury. He further submits that the petitioner no. 2 has five criminal antecedents whereas the petitioner no. 1 has got only one criminal antecedent.

6. Regards being had to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner no. 1 is aged about 21 years, the victim has sustained grievous injury on the non-vital part of his body

3/4 and he has got only one criminal antecedent, I am inclined to grant the petitioner no. 1 privilege of anticipatory bail.

7. This application, so far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, is allowed.

8. Let the petitioner no. 1, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Munger, in connection with Dharhara Police Station Case No. 173 of 2025, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

9. Considering the fact that the petitioner no. 2 has got five criminal antecedents, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner no. 2 privilege of anticipatory bail.

10. This application, so far as petitioner no. 2 is concerned, is dismissed.

(Anil Kumar Sinha, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T √

4/4