Patna High Court
Umesh Rajbhar @ Umesh MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- ANSHUMAN
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail may be granted to accused facing only general allegations, but denied it to those with specific serious allegations of assault, firing, and outraging modesty.
Summary
The petitioners, nine individuals from Rampur village, applied for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 34 of 2026 filed under several sections of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused assaulted the informant, with specific charges of grievous assault with an iron rod against petitioner No. 4 and allegations of firing a pistol and outraging modesty against petitioner No. 9, while the remaining accused faced only general, omnibus allegations. The petitioners argued innocence and highlighted pending criminal cases against some of them, contending the dispute was over a petty matter. The court examined the nature of the allegations and applied the provisions of anticipatory bail under Sections 2(1)(d) and 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023. It granted anticipatory bail to petitioners 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 upon furnishing a bail bond, but rejected anticipatory bail for petitioners 4 and 9, directing the trial court to consider their surrender‑cum‑bail applications separately.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 to accused facing only general allegations.
- Whether specific allegations of grievous assault, firing a weapon, and outraging modesty justify denial of anticipatory bail.
- Application of Sections 2(1)(d) and 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023 in the context of the present FIR.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 2(1)(d), 303(2), 3(5), 482(2), 76
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- specific allegations
- omnibus allegations
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42055 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2026 Thana- SINGHESHWAR District- Madhepura
======================================================
1. Umesh Rajbhar @ Umesh Mandal S/o Late Ramkhelawan Mandal Resident
of Village- Rampur, Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura
2. Narayan Mandal S/o Late Ramkhelawn Mandal Resident of Village-
Rampur, Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura
3. Upendra Rajbhar @ Upendra Mandal S/o Late Ramkhelawan Mandal
Resident of Village- Rampur, Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Singheshwar, District-
Madhepura
4. Sarvottam Mandal S/o Late Mahendra Mandal Resident of Village- Rampur,
Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura
5. Anjali Devi @ Anjani Devi W/o Narayan Mandal Resident of Village-
Rampur, Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura
6. Dilkhush Kumar S/o Umesh Mandal @ Umesh Rajbhar Resident of Village-
Rampur, Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Singheshwar, District- Madhepura
7. Vijay Rajbhar @ Bijay Rajbhar @ Vijay Mandal S/o Upendra Mandal
Resident of Village- Rampur, Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Singheshwar, District-
Madhepura
8. Sarvottam Kumar @ Sarvottam Kumar Rajbhar S/o Narayan mandal @
Narayan Rajbhar Resident of Village- Rampur, Ward No.- 11, P.S.-
Singheshwar, District- Madhepura
9. Om Prakash Rajbhar @ Reshamlal Kumar @ Om Prakash Kumar @ Om
Prakash @ Resham Lal S/o Late Dharmi Rajbhar @ Late Dharni Mandal
Resident of Village- Rampur, Ward No.- 11, P.S.- Singheshwar, District-
Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
ORAL ORDER
2 01-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42055 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
2/5
2. The petitioners are apprehending arrest in
connection with Singheshwar P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026, dated
23.01.2026, lodged under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 76,
109(1), 303(2) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
(hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”) and under Section 27 of
the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against
16 named accused persons, including the present petitioners,
alleging that the petitioners, along with five other co-accused
persons, surrounded and assaulted the brother-in-law of the
informant. They allegedly entered the courtyard of the
informant. The specific allegation against Om Prakash Rajbhar
@ Reshamlal Kumar @ Om Prakash Kumar @ Om Prakash @
Resham Lal (petitioner No. 9) is that he outraged the modesty of
the informant. There is a further specific allegation against
Sarvottam Mandal (petitioner No. 4) that he assaulted the
informant with an iron rod. There is also a specific allegation
against Anjali Devi @ Anjani Devi (petitioner No. 5) that she
slapped the informant. Against the rest of the accused persons,
there are only general and omnibus allegations, except for the
allegation that Om Prakash Kumar fired from a pistol.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42055 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
3/5
petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence.
Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedents of
petitioner Nos. 4, 5 and 7 are clean, whereas the criminal
antecedents of petitioner Nos. 1, 2, 3, 6 and 8 are not clean, as
one criminal case is pending against each of them. So far as
petitioner No. 9 is concerned, two criminal cases are pending
against him. Counsel further submits that, as per the information
received from the pairwikar, the informant and the petitioners’
side are relatives, and the dispute took place over a petty matter.
5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently
opposes the prayer for bail and submits that there is a specific
allegation against petitioner No. 4 that he assaulted the victim
with an iron rod, due to which grievous injury was caused.
Counsel further submits that, against petitioner No. 9, there are
allegations of firing and outraging the modesty of the informant,
and allegations have also been made against the remaining
petitioners. Counsel also submits that the injury reports of
Nagendra Pd. Mandal and Narad Kumar disclose grievous
injuries in nature and Narad Kumar was assaulted by petitioner
No. 4.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
bail of the petitioners but fairly submits that, in the present case,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42055 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
4/5
grievous injury has been caused by petitioner No. 4, and the
allegations of firing and outraging the modesty of the informant
are against petitioner No. 9.
7. In light of the submissions made above, it
transpires to this Court that, except petitioner Nos. 4 and 9,
against whom there are specific allegations of assault, outraging
the modesty of the informant, and firing, the allegations against
the remaining accused persons are general and omnibus in
nature.
8. As such, in the present facts and circumstances of
this case, let the petitioner Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 & 8, namely,
Umesh Rajbhar @ Umesh Mandal, Narayan Mandal, Upendra
Rajbhar @ Upendra Mandal, Anjali Devi @ Anjani Devi,
Dilkhush Kumar, Vijay Rajbhar @ Bijay Rajbhar @ Vijay
Mandal and Sarvottam Kumar @ Sarvottam Kumar Rajbhar be
released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender
before the Trial Court within a period of 4 weeks from today, on
furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand)
each as mentioned in Section 2(1)(d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the
satisfaction of C.J.M., Madhepura, in connection with
Singheshwar P.S. Case No. 34 of 2026, subject to the conditions
as laid down U/s 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42055 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
5/5
9. So far as the bail application of petitioner Nos. 4
and 9, namely, Sarvottam Mandal and Om Prakash Rajbhar @
Reshamlal Kumar @ Om Prakash Kumar @ Om Prakash @
Resham Lal, is concerned, the same is hereby rejected, with
liberty to petitioner Nos. 4 and 9 that, in case they surrender
before the Trial Court within four weeks, the Trial Court shall
consider and pass orders on their surrender-cum-bail
applications on the same day, without being prejudiced by the
fact that their anticipatory bail application has been rejected by
this Court. The Trial Court shall pass appropriate orders on their
applications on their own merits in accordance with law.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.)
Aman Kumar/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.