Patna High Court

Bhupendra Kumar Mehta @ Bhupendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 16 January 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The Court denied bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Bhupendra Kumar Mehta was arrested in connection with a case (PS Jadia Case No. 273 of 2023) alleging offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 354, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, wherein the husband of an informant was allegedly assaulted with a lathi, fatta and iron rod, resulting in his death. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated due to a prior land dispute and argued that the informant was not an eye‑witness and that the allegations against him were vague and omnibus. The State opposed bail, relying on the testimony of an independent witness, Kalanand Yadav, who specifically identified the petitioner as having assaulted the victim with an iron rod. After considering the specific allegation and the witness statement, the Court found the material sufficient to deny bail at this stage. Consequently, the petition for bail was rejected.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in light of the specific allegation of assault with an iron rod.
Whether the lack of a direct eyewitness and the alleged general nature of the FIR allegations justify granting bail.
Whether the independent witness’s identification of the petitioner is sufficient to deny bail.

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 302, 354, 504, 506

Subjects

bail
Indian Penal Code
assault
homicide
false implication
witness testimony
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.67321 of 2025
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-273 Year-2023 Thana- JADIA District- Supaul
                 ======================================================
                 Bhupendra Kumar Mehta @ Bhupendra Kumar S/o Chandeshwari Mehta R/o
                 Village - Fulkaha, Ward No.- 16, P.S - Jadia, District - Supaul
                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                           ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Prafull Chandra Thakur, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   16-01-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State. Perused the Case Diary.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jadia

                   P.S. Case No. 273 of 2023 instituted for the offences under

                   Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 354, 504 and 506 of the Indian

                   Penal Code.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that while the

                   informant was coming with her husband, all the F.I.R. named

                   accused persons assaulted the husband of the informant by

                   means of lathi, Fatta, iron rod, leading to his death.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. He

                   further submitted that due to previous land dispute against the

                   petitioner, the whole members of the family have been
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.67321 of 2025(3) dt.16-01-2026
                                                       2/2




                     implicated in this case. From perusal of the F.I.R. it is crystal

                     clear that the informant is not an eye-witness of the occurrence.

                     No specific allegation against the petitioner rather the same are

                     the general and omnibus in nature. It has been submitted on

                     behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since

                     02.04.2025 and has one criminal antecedent.

                                 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                     opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. There is

                     specific allegation against the petitioner that he has assaulted on

                     the head of the the husband of the informant by means of iron

                     rod. The independent witness namely, Kalanand Yadav in para

                     33 of the case diary stated that petitioner and other co-accused

                     have assaulted the husband of the informant.

                                  6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                     of the case and specific allegation of assault by means of iron

                     rod to the husband of the informant is against the petitioner, this

                     Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

                                  7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the

                     petitioner is, hereby, rejected.


                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…