Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Mohit KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

Summary

The petitioner, Mohit Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita arising from a communal ruckus during the immersion of a Lord Ganesha idol. The incident involved stone‑pelting between members of two communities, and the petitioner was identified from video footage and local testimony, which he claims is a false implication. He asserted a clean antecedent and argued that the allegations were vague and omnibus. The State opposed the bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail on the condition of furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and compliance with Section 482(2) of the BNSS, subject to further conditions. The order was pronounced by Justice Satyavrat Verma.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita in view of the alleged offences.
  • Whether the allegations against the petitioner are sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • false implication
  • communal disturbance
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • criminal procedure
  • clean antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4553 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-485 Year-2025 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui
                 ======================================================
                 Mohit Kumar Son of Pankaj Singh @ Late Vimal Singh R/o Village -
                 Nimrang, P.S. - Jamui, Dist. - Jamui.

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Sanju Singh
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Nawal Kishore Prasad
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   29-04-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2),

                   115(2), 223, 196, 299, 125(A), 125(B) and 109 of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges

                   that during immersion of Lord Ganesha, member of two communities

                   created ruckus and even pelted stones against each other on account

                   of which law and order situation had arisen and after great difficulties

                   the idol was immersed and the accused persons were identified based

                   on the video footage and by the local people.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4553 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
                                                          2/2




                        informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as

                        alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that it would manifest that

                        allegation of creating ruckus and assaulting is general and omnibus in

                        nature. It is further submitted that petitioner resides nearby the place

                        of occurrence and thus on hearing ruckus came to the place of

                        occurrence and might have been videographed but then it is reiterated

                        and submitted that petitioner is not a criminal and is a person with

                        clean antecedent.

                                 5.     Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

                        anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                                 6.     Considering the submissions made by the learned

                        counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of

                        his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be

                        released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/-

                        (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to

                        the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is

                        pending/successor court in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 485

                        of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2)

                        of the BNSS.



                                                  (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Sumit/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.