CR. MISC./53736/2026 of Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar on 17 August 2026

ORAL ORDER

17-08-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 31.05.2026 at 5 P.M. he was returning home on a motorcycle, when on the way he was intercepted by the petitioners and they started abusing, on objection, the petitioners assaulted him by rod causing fracture of right hand, thereafter both the petitioners assaulted by rod indiscriminately causing injury on back and waist and even tried to strangulate and when people gathered they fled with his chain and Rs.5000/-.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that petitioners and the informant are agnates but then the said relevant fact has been concealed in the FIR and an impression has been given that two accused intercepted the informant and committed the occurrence of assault. It is also submitted that even occurrence of assault is exaggerated. It is next submitted that in the market place an altercation took place in which both side assaulted each other but then the instant FIR came to be instituted with an allegation that on account of assault, the informant suffered fracture of hand and also suffered injury on waist and back on account of indiscriminate assault by rod but then it is submitted that from perusal of the order impugned, it would manifest that the injury suffered by the informant has been opined to be simple in nature, which amply demonstrates that the allegations were alleged only to give seriousness to the case. It is next submitted that no doubt mark of injury on neck is seen but then the said injury was not committed by the petitioner. It is also submitted that if privilege of anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioners, the petitioners will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove their innocence.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that informant and petitioners are agnates and the said relationship in the FIR stands concealed.

6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and taking into submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each 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 FCI (Begusarai) P.S. Case No.65 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2)

B.N.S.S.

7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioners despite giving assurance to this court are not co-operating in the investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.

amit/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T