Guddu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74524 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2025 Thana- SARAI RANJAN District- Samastipur ====================================================== Guddu Kumar S/o Shatrudhan Ray @ Shtrudhan Ray Resident of Bajitpur Meyari, Vajitpur Meyari, Bizitpur Meyar, Bazidpur Meari, P.S.- Sarairanjan, District- Samastipur, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Keshav Bhardwaj, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-12-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 351(2), 351(3), 352 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of two cases under the excise act and the informant alleges that accused persons on 08.07.2025 came and Raja said that he disturbs by informing the police, hence kill him, thereafter Subodh caught both his hands and dashed him on the ground and petitioner assaulted by an iron rod causing injury on head and Binod snatched gold Chakti and mobile

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74524 of 2025(2) dt.02-12-2025 2/3 worth Rs. 22,000/-

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant himself alleges that Subodh gave orders to kill on the ground that he keeps informing the police which amply demonstrates that some existing dispute was prevailing in between the parties. It is further submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then the blow was not repeated and the injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple in nature.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner and submits that though it has been submitted that the injury suffered by the injured has been opined to be simple in nature, but then injury report is not on record, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that Raja Kumar had moved before the learned District Court, Samastipur seeking anticipatory bail by filing ABP No. 2206 of 2025 and the same was allowed by an order dated 18.09.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-III Samastipur and from perusal of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74524 of 2025(2) dt.02-12-2025 3/3 the order, it would manifest that the same records that the injury sustained by the injured was opined to be simple in nature.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned trial court within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 124 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of BNSS.

7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands allowed.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T