Nikku Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23749 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-541 Year-2023 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Nikku Kumar S/O Anuj Singh Resident of village- Raghunathpur, PSFatehpur, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sharda Nand Mishra, Mr. Deepak Kumar, Ms. Isha Mishra, Advocates.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Anita Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 541 of 2023 for the offence punishable under sections 341, 323, 307, 504 and 506/34 of the IPC lodged on 21.07.2023 by the informant.

3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is that he along with another accused person, namely, Anuj Singh assaulted the informant, his wife and son inflicting injuries upon them. Accordingly, the FIR.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the parties are agnates and there is a land dispute between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation of overt-act is against two accused persons while

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23749 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 2/3 another accused, namely Anuj Singh has already been extended privilege of regular bail by the District Court itself as is evident from the order impugned. Learned counsel further submits that the injuries, sustained by the informant and his family members, have been found to be simple in nature. It has next been submitted that the dispute between the informant and accused persons has been settled by way of filing a compromise petition which is available at Annexure P/3.

5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that since the injury is there, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. However, he further concedes that the compromise between the parties has been entered into.

6. Considering the nature of injury being simple, coaccused has been granted regular bail by the learned Trial Court itself and there has been compromise between the parties, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail.

7. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23749 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026 3/3 Gaya in connection with aforesaid PS Case, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS as well as the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds; (iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his/their bail bonds.

(Ajit Kumar, J) perwez U T