Nikku Kumar Singh @ Chamanjeet Kumar Singh @ Manjit Kumar Singh @ Nikki Singh @ Chamanjeet Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26398 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-104 Year-2024 Thana- GANGTA District- Munger ====================================================== Nikku Kumar Singh @ Chamanjeet Kumar Singh @ Manjit Kumar Singh @ Nikki Singh @ Chamanjeet Singh S/o- Jai Kishor Singh @ Malik Singh Village- Bara Ps- Gangta Dist- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Ajit Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Shailendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2025 Heard Mr. Ajit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shailendra Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Gangta P.S. Case No. 104 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 351(3), 3(5) of the B.N.S.S.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 01.12.2024 at about 09.00 A.M. Chandan Kumar Singh and Nikku Kumar Singh (petitioner) armed with lathi and other weapons arrived at the informant's place and assaulted Anuranjan Singh on his head with an intention of kill him due to which he got injured and when the mother of Anuranjan Singh and his brothers came to rescue, they were also assaulted including
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26398 of 2025(2) dt.01-05-2025 2/3 Lalita Devi wife of Kunal Singh. The motive behind the occurrence is that they were called in the village meeting for forbidding them from drinking.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Although, the petitioner is named in the F.I.R., but it transpires from the F.I.R. that there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act against him rather there is general and omnibus allegations against all the accused persons including the petitioner and apart from that, there is case and counter case between the parties.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act attributed against him and there is general and omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 Ju-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26398 of 2025(2) dt.01-05-2025 3/3 dicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Munger in connection with Gangta P.S. Case No. 104/2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions:- (I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. (II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his/her criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Saif/- U T