Patna High Court

Uttam Kumar Mandal @ Uttam KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Uttam Kumar Mandal, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, including offences of rioting, assault, and robbery. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner assaulted an informant with an iron rod, but the FIR was lodged after a 17‑day delay with no satisfactory explanation. The petitioner asserted innocence, highlighted the simple nature of the alleged injuries, and pointed to his clean antecedents. The State opposed the bail, but the court considered the delay, the counter‑case between the parties, and the petitioner’s background. Consequently, the High Court granted anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted despite the seriousness of the offences alleged under the IPC.
Whether the 17‑day delay in lodging the FIR warrants a bail order.
Whether the nature of the alleged injuries and the petitioner’s clean antecedents justify bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 341, 379, 504, 506

Subjects

anticipatory bail
delay in FIR
Indian Penal Code
Criminal Procedure Code
high court
bail bond
clean antecedents

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22024 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1060 Year-2023 Thana- KAHALGAON District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 Uttam Kumar Mandal @ Uttam Kumar S/o- Siyaram Mandal R/v- Mirjapur
                 shankarpur Khawas Po- Ghogha Dist- Bhagalpur

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner      :       Mr. Gaurav Prakash, Advocate
                 For the State           :       Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148,

                   149, 341, 323, 307, 504, 506 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

                                3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that this

                   petitioner assaulted on the head of informant with iron rod.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on

                   behalf of the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has

                   committed no offence. The present F.I.R. has been lodged after

                   inordinate delay of 17 days and there is no plausible explanation

                   for the same which itself makes the entire prosecution case

                   doubtful. There is case and counter-case between the parties.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22024 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                                         2/2




                       Doctor has found the injuries, allegedly caused by this

                       petitioner, simple in nature. Petitioner claims clean antecedents.

                                     5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                       opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

                       petitioner.

                                     6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

                       case, case and counter-case between the parties, delay in lodging

                       of the F.I.R., nature of injuries allegedly caused by this

                       petitioner and clean antecedents of the petitioner, the prayer for

                       grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is allowed.

                                     7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within

                       a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named

                       petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.

                       10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                       each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial

                       Magistrate-II, Bhagalpur in connection with Kahalgaon

                       (Ghogha) P.S. Case No. 1060 of 2023, subject to condition as

                       laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…