Patna High Court
Mithilesh Kumar @ Gunjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to a bond and specific conditions.
Summary
Mithilesh Kumar was arrested in connection with a violent incident in which several accused, including him, allegedly assaulted an informant’s husband with weapons, causing grievous injuries. The petitioner sought bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the incident arose from a petty dispute without intent to kill. The prosecution opposed bail, emphasizing the specific allegations and the serious nature of the injuries. The court considered the facts, the petitioner’s lack of prior record, and the need to ensure trial cooperation, and ordered bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties and several conditions. The bail order includes requirements for physical presence, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedent.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused facing multiple serious offences under the Indian Penal Code.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the nature of the dispute justify bail despite allegations of grievous hurt.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 118(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351, 352
Subjects
- bail
- grievous hurt
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal antecedent
- trial cooperation
- evidence tampering
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29560 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2025 Thana- Gidhaur District- Jamui
======================================================
Mithilesh Kumar @ Gunjan Kumar Son of Rajendra Mandal Resident of
Village - Mahuligarh P.O. and P.S.- Gidhour Dist.- Jamui
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arjun Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Bhushan
For the Informant : Mr. Ashok Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since
16.01.2026 in connection with Gidhour P.S. Case No. 54 of
2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2),
109, 303(2), 118(1), 118(2), 351, 352 and 3(5) of BNS.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that
informant Anita Devi alleges that on dated 24.03.2025 at about
10:00 am, she alongwith her husband Shankar Mandal had gone
to cut bamboo tree of their own share. All of a sudden, the
accused persons namely Mithlesh Kumar, Chandan Kumar,
Rajendra Mandal, Savitri Devi, Guddu Kumar, Sukdeo Mandal,
Sarita Devi, Pappu Kumar Mandal and wife of Chandan Kumar
altogether having armed with Tangi, Khanti and Iron rod
surrounded her and her husband and while abusing objected the
cutting of bamboo tree and threatened to kill them. Meanwhile,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29560 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
2/4
Mithlesh Kumar having armed with Tangi assaulted on the head
of the her husband Shankar Yadav due to which her
husband sustained head injury and fell down on the ground and
when her husband was lying on the ground, the accused
Mithlesh Kumar again assaulted him with Tangi due to which he
started blood vomiting. Accused Chandan Kumar assaulted her
husband on his head with iron rod which hit on the hand of her
husband due to which the hand was fractured. When she went to
save her husband, Savitri Devi and Sarita Devi caught her and
wife of Chandan asked Dharmendra Kumar to kill her, upon
which Dharmendra Kumar having armed with iron rod assaulted
on her head due to which she sustained head injury and there
started bleeding and accused Guddu Kumar strangulated her
with an intention to kill her due to which she became
unconscious and fell down on the ground, meanwhile wife of
Chandan snatched away her Mangalsutra and ear ring and the
accused persons considering them dead fled away from the spot.
By the help of police, the informant and her husband was
admitted to Gidhaur government hospital from where they were
referred to government hospital Jamui and thereafter
considering the critical condition of her husband Shankar Yadav,
the doctor referred her husband to Patna.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29560 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
3/4
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent. It is next submitted that it
appears from the FIR that due to some petty dispute the present
occurrence has taken place. It is next submitted there is a case
and counter-case between both the parties and there is specific
allegation against the petitioner that they have assaulted the
husband of the informant by means of tengari and the injury
sustained by the injured person is grievous in nature. Learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that at the spur of the moment
the present occurrence has taken place and there is no intention
to kill anyone and police after investigation has submitted
charge-sheet and the petitioner is in custody since 16.01.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State
and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submit that there is
direct and specific allegation against the petitioner and the
injury inflicted upon the injured person in grievous in nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM, 1 st
Class, Jamui in connection with Gidhour P.S. Case No. 54 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29560 of 2026(2) dt.04-05-2026
4/4
2025, subject to the following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to
move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Gaurav Sinha/-
U T
Checking your session…