Samarjit Kumar Singh @ Sonu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34288 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2026 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali ====================================================== Samarjit Kumar Singh @ Sonu Singh son of Sambhunth Singh @ Shambhu Nath Singh @ Shambhu singh Resident of Village -Madhurapur Kushde PSLalganj Dist- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Manish Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-05-2026 Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 92 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Section 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 303(2), 74,109,352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the allegation, this petitioner and co-accused 'Sonu Singh' assaulted the brother of the informant namely, Raunak Raj, by means of iron rod on his head injuring him.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that there is no allegation of repetition of blow against the petitioner and there happens to be one injury, which is lacerated wound on the middle of Occipital region, the same is opined to be simple in nature and the allegation against the petitioner is not corroborated by the injury report. It has further been submitted that there is case and counter case between the parties

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34288 of 2026(2) dt.18-05-2026 2/2 and although, the petitioner has been made accused in some other cases, but in three of them, police has submitted final form against the petitioner in which the allegations are not true and in one of the cases which is compoundable in nature, parties have compromised the case, while in two cases petitioner is on bail and many of those cases have been filed by informant side. It has further been submitted that the bone of contention is the private loan amount which were taken by the parties.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Heard the parties and perused the record.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M-VIIIcum-Sub-Judge IX Vaishali at Hajipur in connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 92 of 2026, subject to satisfaction of the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. Pawan/- (Praveen Kumar, J) U T