Chitranjan Singh @ Chitranjan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44680 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2026 Thana- CHARPOKHARI District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Chitranjan Singh @ Chitranjan Kumar S/o Kamata Singh R/o Village - Kharanti, P.S - Charpokhari, District - Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bhawana Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 08-07-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Charpokhari P.S. Case No.65 of 2026, F.I.R dated 05.04.2026 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 303(2), 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, on 03.04.2026 at about 8:00 p.m., while the informant's father was preparing to sleep, the accused persons, namely, Chitranjan Kumar, Manoranjan Kumar, Raju Kumar, and Kamta Singh, allegedly assaulted him. It is alleged that Chitranjan Kumar, armed with a farsa, struck the informant's father on the head, causing a head injury. Manoranjan Kumar allegedly assaulted the informant's
2/4 wife and snatched her gold chain, while Raju Kumar assaulted the informant's father with a lathi. Kamta Singh is alleged to have instigated the others by directing them to kill the informant's father. On the basis of these allegations, the FIR was registered.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It has next been submitted that there is case and counter case and there is delay of four days of registration of F.I.R. by the informant being Charpokhari P.S. Case No.66 of 2026 although the alleged occurrence took place on 03.04.2026, and no valid explanation for such delay has been offered by the informant. It has further been submitted both the parties have suffered injuries and the injuries, sustained by the informant, are found to be simple in nature.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail application.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that there is case and counter case and there is delay of four days of registration of F.I.R. by the informant although the alleged occurrence took place on 03.04.2026, and no valid explanation for such delay has been offered by the informant
3/4 and both the parties have suffered injuries, which are found to be simple in nature and the petitioner has clean antecedent. Accordingly, this Court is inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his/her 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate, Bhojpur at Ara, in connection with Charpokhari P.S. Case No.65 of 2026 , subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- (i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative/known of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official document/personal affidavit 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/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself; (iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or
4/4 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 their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) sharun/- U T