Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Raj Kumar MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court held that, on a prima facie basis and given the clean antecedent and the existence of a case and counter‑case, the petitioners were entitled to pre‑arrest bail.

Summary

The petitioners, three brothers from Basmanpur, applied for pre‑arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 117(2), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., alleging they were falsely implicated in an assault on an informant and his family over a pathway dispute. The FIR alleged that the petitioners, along with others, assaulted the informant with lathi‑danda and iron rods, causing injuries and snatching jewellery. The petitioners contended that any injuries were either not caused by them or were incidental in self‑defence, and highlighted their clean antecedent. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences. The court, noting the existence of a case‑and‑counter‑case, the claim of self‑defence and the petitioners’ clean record, found a prima facie case for bail and ordered their release on pre‑arrest bail subject to bond conditions.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioners are entitled to pre‑arrest bail despite being charged under multiple serious offences under the B.N.S.
  • Whether the presence of a case and counter‑case and the claim of self‑defence justify granting bail
  • Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent influences the bail decision

Legislation cited

  • B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352

Subjects

  • pre‑arrest bail
  • criminal procedure
  • self‑defence
  • assault
  • B.N.S.
  • clean antecedent
  • case and counter‑case
  • bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.69688 of 2025
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
                                                        Champaran
                 ======================================================
           1.     Raj Kumar Mukhiya, aged about 34 years (M) son of Mahangu Mukhiya
           2.    Sunil Mukhiya, aged about 27 years (M) Son of Mahangu Mukhiya
           3.    Ranjeet Mukhiya, aged about 30 years (M) S/O Mahangu Mukhiya
                 All are resident of Village- Basmanpur, P.S.- Muffasil, Dist.- East
                 Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
                                                  Ms. Harsha Shashwat, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   23-02-2026                          Heard Ms. Harsha Shashwat, learned counsel

                   appearing on behalf of the petitioners and Mr. Md. Mushtaque

                   Alam, learned APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in connection

                   with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 189 of 2025, registered for the

                   offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 117(2),

                   303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

                                 3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, while the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69688 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
                                            2/4




          informant was returning back to his home on 24.03.2025 at

          about 07:00 p.m., petitioners along with other accused persons

          had surrounded him and started assaulting by means of lathi-

          danda and iron rod causing injury. It is further alleged that when

          the family members of the informant came to save him, the

          accused persons had assaulted them also and snatched ear-ring

          of the mother of the informant.

                       4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

          petitioners submitted that petitioners are innocent and have

          falsely been implicated in the present case. It is not specific that

          the injury, which the informant had sustained on his head is

          attributable either to the petitioners no. 2 or 3. Injury sustained

          by the informant on his hand, which is grievous in nature is

          attributable to the petitioner no. 1, however, the same is not on

          the vital part of the body. There is case and counter case

          between the parties. Both the parties were involved in dispute

          with respect to a pathway, due to which, an altercation took

          place and both the sides entered into fierce fight and in the self-

          defence, petitioners may have caused some injury to the persons

          of the informant, without intention. Petitioners have clean

          antecedent. On these grounds, petitioners seek to be released on

          pre-arrest bail.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69688 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
                                            3/4




                       5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the

          prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.

                       6. Considering the rival submissions made on behalf

          of the parties, as well as, the fact that there is case and counter

          case between the parties. Both the parties were involved in

          dispute with respect to a pathway, due to which, an altercation

          took place and both the sides entered into fierce fight and in the

          self-defence, petitioners may have caused some injury to the

          persons of the informant, without intention. Petitioners have

          clean antecedent. I am of the opinion that petitioners have,

          prima facie, made out a case to be released on pre-arrest bail.

                       7. The petitioners, above named, are directed to be

          released on pre-arrest bail, in the event of their arrest or

          surrender before the learned District Court within a period of

          four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/-

          (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the

          like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District Court

          where the case is pending, in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case

          No. 189 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under

          Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                       8. The learned District Court is directed to verify

          the criminal antecedent of the petitioners as stated in

          paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
              Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.69688 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
                                                          4/4




                        pending against the petitioners as what has been stated in

                        paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.



                                                  (Purnendu Singh, J)
Niraj/-

U         T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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