Patna High Court
Vikash MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SHAILENDRA SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to petitioner no.1 (Vikash Mandal) and granted to petitioner no.2 (Lakshman Mandal) subject to bail bond and conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Vikash Mandal and Lakshman Mandal, applied for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 177/2025 alleging assault with an iron rod and a sword. The petitioners argued that the injuries to the complainant, Chander Mandal, were minor, that Vikash had been acquitted in two prior cases and Lakshman had no criminal antecedent, and that the allegations were false. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences, the presence of a vital‑part injury, and the complainant’s economic hardship. The Court rejected anticipatory bail for Vikash Mandal, finding the injury report and seriousness of the charge sufficient to deny relief. Conversely, the Court granted anticipatory bail to Lakshman Mandal, noting the lack of injury attributable to the alleged sword and imposing a bail bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Vikash Mandal given the nature of the alleged assault and injury report.
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Lakshman Mandal in view of the absence of injury attributable to the alleged weapon.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- weapon offence
- injury report
- Section 482
- Bihar law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4532 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-177 Year-2025 Thana- DHARHARA District- Munger
======================================================
1. Vikash Mandal Son of Jateshwar Mandal R/o Village-Itawa, P.S. - Dharhara,
Dist. - Munger.
2. Lakshman Mandal @ Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Raj @ Lakshman Kumar Son
of Munnilal Mandal R/o Village - Raghunathpur, P.S. - Dharhara, Dist. -
Munger.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Isha Mishra, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH
ORAL ORDER
2 24-02-2026 Heard Ms. Isha Mishra, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Mr. Pradeep Narain Kumar, learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Dharhara P.S. Case No. 177/ 2025 registered for the
offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 126(2), 115(2), 118(1),
117(2), 74, 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS and section 27
of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
both the petitioners are alleged to have assaulted Chander
Mandal by means of iron rod and sword but only two injuries,
being in the nature of tenderness and lacerated wound, were
found on his body and the same were opined to be simple in
nature and the manner of assault as well as the weapons as
alleged in the FIR does not get corroboration from the medical
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4532 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
2/3
opinion, against the petitioner no.1, there were two criminal
cases but he has been acquitted in both the said cases and the
petitioner no.2 bears no criminal antecedent, so, at present
against both the petitioners, there is no criminal antecedent. It is
further submitted that in actual, on the alleged date of
occurrence, the father of the petitioner no.1 was sitting at the
door of his house when the husband of the informant, who is
accused in several cases, started abusing him and thereafter,
petitioner no.1 called the police after dialling 112 and when the
police arrived, the informant’s husband, Chander Mandal, fled
away and thereafter, he and his son, Chotu Kumar, came to the
door of the petitioner no.1 and abused him and also assaulted
him and thereafter, in defence, the present FIR has been
registered. It is lastly submitted that petitioner no.2 is son-in-law
of brother of petitioner no.1 and has been falsely roped in the
alleged occurrence.
4. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed
the bail prayer of the petitioners and submits that on the person
of the injured, Chander Mandal, two injuries were found, out of
which one was on a vital part and further, the informant on
account of her poor economic condition could not get her
husband properly treated at a medical centre.
5. Considering the seriousness of the allegation
appearing against the petitioner no.1, which is getting support
from the injury report of the informant’s husband, this court is
not inclined to release the petitioner no.1 on anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, his prayer stands rejected.
6. So far as petitioner no.2 is concerned, no
corresponding injury attributable to the alleged weapon of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4532 of 2026(2) dt.24-02-2026
3/3
sword was found on the body of the informant’s husband though
he is alleged to have assaulted him by the said means, so,
considering this aspect, this court is inclined to grant relief of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.2. Accordingly, let the
petitioner no.2, named-above, in the event of his
arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period
of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail in
connection with Dharhara P.S. Case No. 177/ 2025 on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
the Court concerned, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
(Shailendra Singh, J)
BKS/-
U T
Checking your session…