Pintu @ Nitish Yadav @ Nitish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30873 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-362 Year-2023 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== 1.
Pintu @ Nitish Yadav @ Nitish Kumar Son of Lalan Yadav Resident of village - Tamaut Parsa, Ward No. 09, P.S.- Murliganj, District - Madhepura. 2.
Sittu Kumar @ Sintu Yadav @ Sintu Kumar Son of Lalan Yadav Resident of village - Tamaut Parsa, Ward No. 09, P.S.- Murliganj, District - Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sunil Kumar Yadav, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Ajit Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 362 of 2023 for the offence punishable under sections 341, 323, 324, 379, 307, 354(A) lodged on 07.05.2025 by the informant.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioners is that they along with other co-accused persons abused the informant on the issue of pouring dirty tap and pit water in front of the door of the informant and when the informant objected to, his sister-in-law, nephew and daughterin-law were beaten and they were also threatened of dire consequences. Accordingly, the FIR.
2/4
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR and they have falsely been implicated in this case due to old enmity. There is a case and counter case between the parties. The petitioners' father namely, Lalan Yadav has instituted an FIR against the informant and others under the same Sections of the IPC as has been done in the present FIR. The allegation against these petitioners is general and omnibus in nature while allegation of assault is against Tuntun Yadav, Lalan Yadav and Laltu Yadav who are said to have inflicted injuries upon the nephew of the informant and others. It has further been submitted that the co-accused, Tuntun Yadav who is said to have caused injuries to the nephew of the informant, has been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 21.01.2026 vide Cr. Misc. No. 57864 of 2025 and these petitioners have got clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the allegations against these petitioners which are general and omnibus in nature and the coaccused of this case, namely, Tuntun Yadav has been granted anticipatory bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, and the
3/4 petitioners have got clean antecedent, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. Let the petitioners, 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, Madhepura 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
4/4 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