Ankit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58482 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2024 Thana- Chhaudahi District- Begusarai ====================================================== Ankit Kumar, S/O Kailash Sah, Resident of village- Ekamba Shekhatola, Ward no. 4, P.S.- Chhaurhi, District- Begusarai, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Chandan Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 29-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Chhaurahi P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024 registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 354(B), 379, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that the petitioner along with others had assaulted the husband of the informant, who fell unconscious and, thereafter, when she intervened, even she was assaulted and they received grievous injury and it is also alleged that
2/4 the petitioner and one Bittu also caused a fracture of the left shoulder of her husband.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated and no such occurrence has taken place. It has been submitted that the allegations levelled in the FIR are not corroborated from the perusal of the injury report, which has been brought on record by way of Annexure P3, wherein the husband of the informant's injury report is placed and there is only injury found on the parietal region that too is simple in nature. It has been further submitted that the police after investigation has submitted final form, however, the learned Court below differed from the same and took cognizance against the petitioner. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has got clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let the petitioner above named be released on anticipatory
3/4 bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Chhaurahi P.S. Case No. 56 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of B.N.S.S. as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution
4/4 shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned 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 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.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) manoj/- U T