Arjun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.46921 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-280 Year-2026 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== 1.
Arjun Kumar S/o Upendra Yadav 2.
Ranjit Yadav S/o Ramchandra Gope Both are Resident of Village - Gosaibigha, P.S - Noorsarai, District - Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Satya Prakash, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-07-2026 Heard Mr. Satya Prakash learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 280 of 2026 registered for the offence(s) punishable under Sections 115(2), 109(1), 118(1), 117(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the accused persons named therein including the petitioners assaulted the informant and his family members, causing injuries.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46921 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026 2/3 falsely been implicated in the present case. There is case and counter case between the parties arising out of same incidence and due to dispute regarding the raising of a roof over the wall, an altercation took place and both the sides entered into fierce fight, in which, both the sides sustained injuries and in the selfdefence, petitioners may have caused some injury on the persons of the informant and his family members. The injury sustained by the injured persons, attributable to the petitioners, has been opined by the doctor to be simple in nature. Petitioners have clean antecedents. On these grounds, the petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf of the parties, as well as, having perused the allegation made in the FIR and the fact that there is case and counter case between the parties arising out of same incidence and due to dispute regarding the raising of a roof over the wall, an altercation took place and both the sides entered into fierce fight and in the self-defence, petitioners may have caused some injury on the persons of the informant and his family members without any intention and the injuries are found to be simple in nature,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.46921 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026 3/3 I am of the opinion that petitioners, who have clean antecedents, have, prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioners, above named, are directed to be released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned District Court within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Nalanda at Biharsharif / Concerned Court in connection with Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 280 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and if it is found that the petitioners are involved in some other cases, as what has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail application, this order will automatically lose its force. (Purnendu Singh, J) Sanjay/- U T