Patna High Court
Virendra Mahto @ Virendra Kumar RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
Virendra Mahto applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 74, 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. He contended that he has a clean record and that the informant’s allegations are false, noting that the FIR improperly includes Section 103 (causing death) despite no death having occurred. The petitioner also highlighted a prior case (Suryagarha P.S. Case No. 01 of 2026) in which the informant was alleged to have assaulted his son, suggesting a motive to malign him. The State opposed the anticipatory bail application. The Court, after considering the submissions, held that anticipatory bail could be granted subject to the petitioner furnishing bail bonds and sureties, and complying with conditions under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The order directs that the bail be released if the petitioner is arrested or surrenders within six weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 CrPC/Section 482 B.N.S.S. in view of the allegations.
- Whether the inclusion of Section 103 in the FIR is valid when no death has occurred.
- Whether the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the offence.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- FIR
- Section 103
- Criminal Procedure Code
- B.N.S.S.
- bail conditions
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15029 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-2 Year-2026 Thana- SURYAGARHA District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Virendra Mahto @ Virendra Kumar Rai S/o Late Bhuwneshwar Mahto R/o
Village - Babadham Jagdishpur, P.S - Suryagarha, District - Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 24-03-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 74, 103(1) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that accused persons came to his house on 31.12.2025, at
03:00 p.m., and petitioner was talking to his brother, namely,
Kartik on mobile who gave orders to throw the informant and
others from the house. Further, the petitioner assaulted the
informant by an iron rod causing injury on his head while
Gulshan snatched dupatta of his nice and Gaurav assaulted her
causing injury on head, thereafter, Anil, Vijay and Surendra
assaulted the wife of the informant by lathi causing injury on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15029 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
2/3
hand and leg.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
informant. It is further submitted that from perusal of the
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the FIR
was instituted under Section 103 of the BNS when no one was
killed in the occurrence. It is, thus, submitted that Section 103 of
the BNS was deliberately added. It is next submitted that from
the side of the petitioner, Suryagarha P.S. Case No. 01 of 2026
came to be instituted against the informant and others. It is also
submitted that in Suryagarha P.S. Case No. 01 of 2026, it is
alleged that son of the petitioner was assaulted by the side of the
informant causing injury on his head. It is further submitted that
the injury suffered by the informant and his side in the instant
case has been opined to be simple in nature as would manifest
from the injury report of Nagendra Mahto annexed as
Annexure-P/5 to the anticipatory bail application.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner, above-named, in the
event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15029 of 2026(2) dt.24-03-2026
3/3
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 Suryagarha P.S. Case No. 02 of 2026, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the
Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…