Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Pappu Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 25 February, 2026
Author: J.K. Maheshwari
Bench: J.K. Maheshwari
ITEM NO.1 COURT NO.3 SECTION II-A
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.)
No. 19584/2025
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order
dated 09-07-2025 in CRLM No. 41731/2025 passed by
the High Court of Judicature at Patna]
PAPPU KUMAR & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION)
Date : 25-02-2026
This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ATUL S. CHANDURKAR
For Petitioner(s) :
Mr. R.P. Luthra, Adv.
Mr. Anjani Kumar Mishra, AOR
Mr. Himanshu Luthra, Adv.
Mr. Praveen Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Adv.
Mr. Akshay K Goswami, Adv.
Mr. Vikas Singh, Adv.
Mr. Prashant Giri, Adv.
Mr. Ravinder Singh, Adv.
Mr.Gyanendra Kumar Pandey, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NIDHI AHUJA
Date: 2026.02.25
18:14:46 IST
Reason: SLP (Crl.) No. 19584/2025 1
For Respondent(s) :
Mr. Samir Ali Khan, AOR
Mr. Pranjal Sharma, Adv.
Mr. Amarjeet Sahani, Adv.
Mrs. Amita Agarwal, Adv.
Ms. Shweta Bhardwaj, Adv.
Mr. Parvinder, Adv.
Dr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel
the Court made the following
O R D E R
1) The petitioners are apprehending their
arrest in connection with FIR No. 152 of
2019 dated 04.05.2019 registered at Police
Station Ghorasahan, Sikrahana, East
Champaran for the offences punishable
under Sections 341, 323, 324, 325, 379,
307 and 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code,
1860.
2) The settlement arrived at between the
injured/ complainant and the accused
persons was filed before the High Court.
SLP (Crl.) No. 19584/2025 2
The same has also been placed before us.
However, joining the injured and the
complainant, notice was issued.
3) Dr. Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Advocate on
Record, appears on behalf of the injured
and the complainant and submits that they
have settled the dispute and compromise
entered into between them is correct;
however, they have no objection to release
the petitioners on anticipatory bail.
4) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of
the respondent-State submits that in case
the injured and the complainant themselves
do not have any objection, the Court may
take a decision.
5) After hearing learned counsel and
considering all the aspects and all the
attending circumstances, without
SLP (Crl.) No. 19584/2025 3
expressing any opinion on the merits of
the case, we deem it appropriate to
release the petitioners on anticipatory
bail.
6) In view of the above, we direct that
in the event of arrest, the petitioners
shall be released on bail on furnishing
suitable bail bonds and sureties and on
such other terms and conditions as may be
deemed fit by the Station House Officer of
the concerned police station.
7) We further direct that the petitioners
shall join the investigation as and when
required and co-operate in the same
abiding all the conditions as specified
under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
8) It is made clear here that violation,
if any, by the petitioners, may give a
SLP (Crl.) No. 19584/2025 4
cause to take recourse as permissible and
the trial Court is at liberty to do the
needful.
9) Accordingly, and in view of the
foregoing, this special leave petition
stands disposed of. Pending
application(s), if any, shall stand
disposed of.
(NIDHI AHUJA) (NAND KISHOR)
DEPUTY REGISTRAR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
SLP (Crl.) No. 19584/2025 5
