Patna High Court
Chutahru MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RITESH KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners 1, 3 and 4 but denied it to petitioner 2 (Buddhu Mukhiya) due to the serious allegation of causing grievous injury.
Summary
Four individuals (Chutahru, Buddhu, Sapen and Biren Mukhiya) sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (Jadia PS Case No.94 of 2025) alleging multiple offences under the B.N.S., 2023, including assault and grievous injury. The FIR, filed 28 days after the incident, alleged that the accused entered the informant's house armed, demolished her hut and assaulted her, her son and husband, with Buddhu Mukhiya specifically accused of inflicting a grievous injury on the informant's son using a farsa. The petitioners argued innocence, delay in filing the FIR, simple nature of most injuries and clean antecedents. The court examined the allegations, noting that only Buddhu Mukhiya faced a serious charge of causing grievous injury, while the others were linked to simple injuries. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail to petitioners 1, 3 and 4 with a Rs.10,000 bond and verification conditions, but denied bail to Buddhu Mukhiya, citing the seriousness of the specific allegation against him.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to all petitioners in view of the allegations and the delay in filing the FIR
- Whether the specific allegation of causing grievous injury by petitioner no.2 warrants denial of bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 191(2), 303(2), 324(2), 351(2), 352, 74
- B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR delay
- assault
- grievous injury
- bail conditions
- criminal antecedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20590 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2025 Thana- JADIA District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Chutahru Mukhiya S/O Bauku Mukhiya Resident of Village - Naya Nagar
(Moharrampur), Ward No. 18, Police Station - Jadiya, District - Supaul
2. Buddhu Mukhiya @ Buddh Mukhiya Son of Boku Mukhiya Resident of
Village - Naya Nagar (Moharrampur), Ward No. 18, Police Station - Jadiya,
District - Supaul
3. Sapen Mukhiya @ Sepan Mukhiya Son of Ram Prasad Mukhiya Resident of
Village - Naya Nagar (Moharrampur), Ward No. 18, Police Station - Jadiya,
District - Supaul
4. Biren Mukhya Son of Maheshwari Mukhiya Resident of Village - Naya
Nagar (Moharrampur), Ward No. 18, Police Station - Jadiya, District -
Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Patla Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. (Dr.) Indiwar Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RITESH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 08-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Jadia P.S. Case No.94 of 2025, for having allegedly
committed offences under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2),
118(1), 117(2), 109(1), 74, 324(2), 303(2), 352 and 351(2) of
the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, registered on the basis
of written report submitted by the informant, on 04.04.2025, all
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20590 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
2/4
the accused persons named in the FIR came to the house of the
informant armed with iron rod and other arms and started
demolishing the hut of the informant. When the informant tried
to stop them, all the accused persons started assaulting the
informant. The petitioners no.2 and 4 caught hold of the
informant and assaulted her with leg and fist. When the son of
the informant came to rescue her, accused Ram Prasad Mukhiya
caught hold of him and the petitioner no.2 assaulted him on his
head with a farsa due to which he sustained injuries and fell
unconscious. When the husband of the informant came back to
his village, upon receiving information, co-accused Parsuram
Mukhiya assaulted him with iron rod and petitioner no.3 broke
his hand.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
all the petitioners are innocent and the First Information Report
has been lodged after a delay of almost 28 days and there is no
explanation for such delay. It is further submitted that, as per the
injury report, the injury sustained by the informant is simple in
nature, however her son and her husband have some injuries,
out of which, one injury was found to be grievous in nature. It is
also submitted that the petitioners have got clean antecedent.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20590 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
3/4
for bail.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and after going through the records, it transpires that specific
allegation of assaulting the son of the informant with farsa is on
petitioner no.2, Buddhu Mukhiya @ Buddh Mukhiya due to
which, the son of the informant sustained grievous injury and
apart from the same, other injuries on the informant and her son
are found to be simple in nature.
7. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, let
petitioners no.1, 3 and 4, above-named, in the event of their
arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks, be released on
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 District & Additional Sessions Judge-
IV, Supaul in connection with Jadia P.S. Case No.94 of 2025,
subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the
B.N.S.S. with a further condition that:-
The learned court concerned shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage it is found
that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the
court concerned shall take steps for cancellation of bail bonds of
the petitioners. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20590 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
4/4
of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose
of or in the name of verification.
8. So far petitioner no.2, namely, Buddhu Mukhiya @
Buddh Mukhiya is concerned, since specific allegation of
assaulting the son of the informant with farsa is against him and
due to which, the son of the informant sustained grievous injury,
this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail
to the petitioner no.2, Buddhu Mukhiya @ Buddh Mukhiya,
and, accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to petitioner no.2,
Buddhu Mukhiya @ Buddh Mukhiya is hereby rejected.
(Ritesh Kumar, J.)
Sanjay/-
U T
Checking your session…