Patna High Court

Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 17 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.

Summary

The petitioner, Mukesh Kumar, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under several IPC sections for alleged assault and robbery. He contended that the FIR was based on a non‑eyewitness informant and that he was falsely implicated, asserting no relation to the alleged victim Vikash. The State opposed the bail. The Court examined the allegations, noted the petitioner’s clean record, and considered the lack of specific evidence linking him to the crime. It granted anticipatory bail, subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties of equal amount, and compliance with conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC. The order was made to be effective if the petitioner is arrested or surrenders within six weeks.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 438 of the CrPC in view of the allegations in the FIR.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 438
Criminal Procedure Code
false implication
IPC offences
bail conditions

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4680 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2023 Thana- KUTUMBA District- Aurangabad
                 ======================================================
                 Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Yadav S/o Arun Yadav R/o Village- Amarpur, P.S-
                 Kutumba, Dist- Aurangabad (Bihar)

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Aman Vishal
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   17-03-2026                  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 341, 323,

                   504, 506, 307, 379, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant

                   alleges that his sister used to go for coaching when on the way

                   Vikash used to eve-tease her and also took her photographs and

                   posted on social medial with obscene comments, which was

                   objected by the informant and his side by complaining to the

                   parents of Vikash, on account of which a dispute arose, next

                   alleges that on 15.05.2023 his uncle after attending a wedding

                   was going to attend nature’s call and when he reached near
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4680 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
                                            2/3




          Ajay’s house, he was intercepted by seven named accused

          persons including the petitioner and they assaulted him by sharp

          edged weapon causing injury on head and also took away his

          chain.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the

          informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the

          allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that

          informant is not an eyewitness to the occurrence and the

          allegation of assault is also not specific. On query of the Court

          that whether petitioner is related to Vikash or not, on which, it

          has been asserted and submitted that petitioner is not related to

          Vikash.

                       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
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4680 of 2026(2) dt.17-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                       with Kutumba P.S. Case No.128/2023, subject to the conditions

                       as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

U        T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…