Patna High Court
Satrudhan Kumar @ Satrudhan MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The petitioner is entitled to pre‑arrest bail under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner, Satrudhan Kumar, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case arising from a land‑dispute‑related altercation in which he was alleged to have assaulted an informant and caused injury to the informant’s wife. The FIR charges him under several sections of the BNS, including offences relating to murder, attempt to murder and causing hurt. The petitioner contended that the incident was a spontaneous fight in self‑defence, that the injury was simple, and that he has a clean criminal record. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The Court, after considering the facts and the petitioner’s clean antecedent, held that he had made out a prima facie case for pre‑arrest bail and ordered his release on bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS. The District Court was directed to verify his antecedents and any pending cases, after which the bail order would stand.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail can be granted under Section 482(2) of the BNSS for the offences alleged.
- Whether the circumstances of a land‑dispute‑related fight and claim of self‑defence justify bail despite serious charges.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean criminal antecedent influences the bail decision.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- self‑defence
- land dispute
- Section 482
- BNS offences
- criminal antecedent
- injury
- bail bond
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25425 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-107 Year-2025 Thana- BANIAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Satrudhan Kumar @ Satrudhan Mahto, Male, aged about 22 Years, Son of
Harendra Mahto, Resident of Village- Beruie, P.S.- Baniyapur, District- Saran
at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shakti Suman Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard Mr. Shakti Suman Kumar, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Jharkhandi
Upadhyay, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection
with Baniyapur P.S. Case No. 107 of 2025 registered for the
offence punishable under Sections 127(1), 115(2), 118(1),
117(2), 109, 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, petitioner
along with other co-accused persons, with an intention to kill,
had assaulted the informant side causing injury.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely
been implicated in the present case. Both the parties were
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25425 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
involved in dispute with respect to a piece of land, due to which,
an altercation took place and both the sides entered into free
fight and in the self-defence, petitioner may have caused some
injury to the persons of the informant, without intention. Injury
attributable to the petitioner, which the wife of the informant
had sustained, has been opined by the doctor to be simple in
nature. There is case and counter case between the parties.
Petitioner has clean antecedent. On these grounds, petitioner
seeks to be released on pre-arrest bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Considering the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, the fact that both the parties were
involved in dispute with respect to a piece of land, due to which,
an altercation took place and both the sides entered into free
fight and in the self-defence, petitioner may have caused some
injury to the persons of the informant, without intention. Injury
attributable to the petitioner, which the wife of the informant
had sustained, has been opined by the doctor to be simple in
nature. There is case and counter case between the parties.
Petitioner has clean antecedent. I am of the opinion that
petitioner has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25425 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
pre-arrest bail.
7. The petitioner, above named, is directed to be
released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of his/her arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned District Court where the
case is pending, in connection with Baniyapur P.S. Case No. 107
of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section
482(2) of the BNSS.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.