Bimlesh Kumar Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74434 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-69 Year-2025 Thana- ANGARGHAT District- Samastipur ====================================================== Bimlesh Kumar Paswan Son of Dasrath Paswan Resident Of VillageRampur, Samathu, Ward no. 1, Ps- Angarghat, Dist- Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Saroj Kumar Sharma For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad- A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-11-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 105 and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that his daughter about a week had come to her parental home from her matrimonial home and was suffering from skin disease. Accordingly, on 18.06.2025, he called Bimlesh for giving injection, but Bimlesh sent his brother Amarjit who had no experience of giving injection, as such, after Amarjit injected his daughter, the condition of his daughter deteriorated thereafter Amarjit called Bimlesh who came and
2/4 gave another injection and assured that she will be fine. Further, at 9.00 P.M. both the brothers left and thereafter the condition of his daughter deteriorated and on the way to hospital she died.
4. The 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 it was informant who had called the informant for giving injection to his daughter who was suffering from skin disease. It is submitted that the petitioner suffers from blood cancer, as such, he asked his younger brother Amarjit to go to the house of the informant for giving injection. It is next submitted that after the daughter of the informant was injected and her condition deteriorated, Amarjit called him and accordingly, he reached the place of occurrence and gave another injection to control the reaction and thereafter, both brothers left at 9.00 P.M.
as is alleged in the FIR and it was thereafter the condition of the victim deteriorated leading to her death, as such, it cannot be alleged that on account of injection being given by the petitioner the victim died.
3/4 Rule Skill India, as such, petitioner is competent to give injection. It is further submitted that the cause of death till date has not been ascertained as FSL Report is awaited.
5. Learned A.P.P. Sri Chandra Bhushan Prasad opposes the anticipatory bail application and submits that there is a specific allegation against Amarjit of injecting the victim leading to deterioration of her condition and thereafter petitioner came and he also injected, but then, it is submitted that neither the FIR, nor in the anticipatory bail application, it is pleaded that as to which injection the petitioner injected on coming to know that condition of the victim was deteriorated. It is next submitted that investigation is in its nascent stages, if anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond, on which the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
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 Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
4/4 each to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor Court in connection with Angarghat P. S. Case No.69 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
8. However, it is made clear that in the event, if any application is filed by the Investigating Officer before the learned trial Court bringing to its notice that petitioner, despite giving assurance to this Court, is not cooperating in the investigation or is not presenting himself as and when required, the learned trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after recording reasons.
9. Further, it is made clear that in the event, if chargesheet is submitted connecting the petitioner with the offence in that event, the present anticipatory bail order shall loose its effect.
10.
Let a copy of this order be sent to the concerned Police Station through the learned trial Court. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T