Patna High Court
Deepak Mandal @ Deepak KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted to the petitioner as the specific allegations and medical evidence of grievous injury warranted denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Deepak Mandal, was named in an FIR for assaulting an informant with a shocker pipe, causing fractures in both hands, and demanding extortion of Rs.50,000, along with other offences under the Bihar Penal Code. He applied for anticipatory bail, arguing that the injuries were to non‑vital parts and did not show an intention to cause death, relying on a Supreme Court decision in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Shamsher Singh. The State opposed, pointing to the specific allegation that the petitioner inflicted the injuries and a medical report confirming the fractures. The Court examined the factual matrix, the seriousness of the alleged offences, and the corroborative medical evidence. Concluding that the allegations were specific and serious, the Court rejected the petition for anticipatory bail, directing that regular bail, if sought after surrender, be decided in accordance with law.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the petitioner is specifically alleged to have caused grievous hurt under Section 109 of the Bihar Penal Code.
- Whether injury to a non‑vital part of the body negates the intention to cause death for the purpose of denying anticipatory bail.
- Whether the presence of corroborative medical evidence and specific allegations preclude the grant of anticipatory bail.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- grievous hurt
- Section 109
- Bihar Penal Code
- medical evidence
- extortion
- assault
- bail jurisprudence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27185 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2025 Thana- DARBHANGA District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Deepak Mandal @ Deepak Kumar S/o Jibachh Mandal Resident of Mohalla -
Shivaji Nagar Fulwadi, Police - Station - Town, District - Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Adv
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Town P.S. Case No.
86 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections
115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 303(2), 308(3), 109, 351(2), 352 and
3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per FIR, petitioner alleged to assault informant
along with other co-accused persons by using shocker pipe
causing fracture in both hands and also demanded extortion of
Rs.50,000/- from him on several occasions. Alleged occurrence
took place due to non-payment of extortion amount of
Rs.50,000/- and further other co-accused person alleged to
snatch Rs.8,400/- from the pocket of informant and also to
snatch one gold chain worth of Rs.25,000/-.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27185 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
2/3
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that the injury is not the sole criteria
under Section 109 of the BNS and moreover injury as alleged
was caused on non-vital part of the body, which sufficiently
suggest that petitioner was not under intention to cause death
having all occasion to assault on the vital part of the body,
particularly when petitioner was in the group of 5 named and 15
unknown persons. In support of his submission, learned counsel
relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as
available through State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Shamsher
Singh, [2025 SCC OnLine SC 807]. While concluding
arguments, it is submitted that petitioner found involved in one
more criminal case where he is on bail.
5. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail
submitted that informant brutally assaulted during the course of
occurrence and he alleged specifically against this petitioner
through FIR that he was the person, who assaulted on his both
hands causing fracture by using shocker pipe. It is further
submitted that in view of specific allegation, petitioner does not
deserves anticipatory bail. It is pointed that upon medical
examination both hands of petitioner was found fractured
corroborating with the statement as made through FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27185 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
3/3
6. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by
taking note of fact as allegation is specifically available against
petitioner to cause multiple grievous injury upon informant during
the course of occurrence as discussed aforesaid, which duly
appears corroborating with his medical report, accordingly prayer
of anticipatory bail of petitioner stands rejected.
7. If petitioner surrenders before the court below, the
prayer of regular bail shall be decided in accordance with law
without being prejudiced with any observations made here-in-
above.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
S.Tripathi/-
U T
Checking your session…