Aman Kumar @ Aman Patel v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63326 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-257 Year-2024 Thana- MAJORGANJ District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Aman Kumar @ Aman Patel S/O Late Lal Bachan Patel R/O MohallaHanuman Nagar, Pachharwa, Ward no. 13, Majorganj, Dist.- Sitamarhi, Pin843332 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Uday Kumar, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-09-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Majorganj P.S. Case No. 257 of 2024, dated 17.08.2024, registered under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 316(2), 318(4), 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 16.08.2024 at 10:30 P.M., while the informant was sleeping in his house, he received a call of Lalita Devi that there is a serpent in her house and she called him to come urgently for rescue. Thereafter, he went to the house of Lalita Devi, where Shatrudhan Patel, Amod Patel, Aman Patel, Satyendra Patel, Madhu Patel, Pramod Patel and Sanjay Patel were hiding and they all attacked the informant. Aman Patel assaulted with the butt of pistol, Amod Patel assaulted
2/4 with tangi, Shatrudhan Patel assaulted with dabiya and other accused persons assaulted with lathi and danda, due to which lot of blood oozed out from the body of the informant. Thereafter, all of them took away him to Brahmasthan and tied with a tree and assaulted him, due to which he became unconscious. On noise in the village, his son Vikki Kumar arrived, who was followed by Aman Patel and his son ran away saving his life. Thereafter, on call, patrolling vehicle arrived and brought the informant to Majorganj for treatment and from there he was referred to Sadar hospital, Sitamarhi. The cause of occurrence is money dispute. Rs. 1,00,000/- was borrowed by Lalita Devi and she was not willing to return the same, for which case has also been lodged and she had threatened to kill the informant. He was referred to S.K.M.C.H., Muzaffarpur from Sadar Hospital, Sitamarhi for better treatment.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that entire allegations referred against the petitioner is false and concocted. Both the parties are co-villagers and there are money dispute from before. From the F.I.R. it is clear that money dispute is going on between the informant and Lalita Devi, for which she had threatened not to record his statement against her in money suit, as such there was no occasion for him to go at her house in the night. A false story has been propounded by the informant to lodge the present case. There is Money Suit going on
3/4 between the parties. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is in no way concerned with the alleged occurrence, but only being the son of Lalita Devi, his name has been involved in the present case. Post-mortem report does not support the allegation alleged in the F.I.R. From the entire materials, which is said to have been collected during course of investigation and post-mortem report, the complicity of the petitioner is doubtful and the co-accused person namely Pramod Patel, who is said to have been granted anticipatory bail on 20.06.2025, vide Cr. Misc. No. 36692 of 2025 and Sanjay Kumar has also been granted anticipatory bail, against whom similar allegation of crime has been alleged in the F.I.R., vide order dated 20.06.2025 vide Cr. Misc. No. 40130 of 2025 by a coordinate Bench of this Court.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts that the injuries are simple in nature, where the involvement of the petitioner is not very specific and further there being money dispute existing between the parties from before, for which there is Money Suit is going on between the parties, let the above named petitioner, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, on furnishing
4/4 bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Sitamarhi in connection with Majorganj P.S. Case No. 257 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. 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/her/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 from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. pravinkumar/- (Ajit Kumar, J) U T