Munna Kumar @ Munna Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.562 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2025 Thana- CHANPATIA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Munna Kumar @ Munna Ram S/o Mukhlal Ram R/o Village- Barohiya, P.SChanpatia, Dist- West Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Alexander Ashok, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 17-02-2026 Heard Mr. Alexander Ashok, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Chanpatiya P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 15.07.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 303(2), 351(2), 352, 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has assaulted with iron rod on informant's head and causing injury.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricted and the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.562 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026 2/3 petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. From perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he has assaulted to the informant by means of iron rod upon his head and he has received injury. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is no intention to kill anyone and there is case and counter case between the parties. Although the informant has received injury but the injury report of the informant suggests that the injury is simple in nature caused by hard and blunt object.

5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and the injury inflicted upon the injured person is simple in nature, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Champaran, Bettiah in connection with Chanpatiya P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025, subject

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.562 of 2026(2) dt.17-02-2026 3/3 to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/ Section 482(2) of BNSS, 2023 and with other following conditions :-

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(3) And, further condition that the 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.

Ibrar//- (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) U T