Patna High Court
Dinesh MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted as the allegations and injury report established a prima facie case against the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail after an FIR (Majhauliya PS Case No. 265 of 2025) was lodged under several provisions of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023, alleging assault, outraging modesty, and theft. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner struck the informant twice and participated in a scuffle that resulted in injuries to the victim's parietal region and thumb. The petitioner contended that he has no prior criminal record and that the incident was a minor dispute among children that was exaggerated in the FIR. The court examined the injury report, which corroborated the seriousness of the injuries and supported the prosecution's allegations. Considering the nature of the offenses and the evidentiary support, the court held that there was no ground to grant anticipatory bail and consequently rejected the petitioner's application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 in view of the alleged offenses.
- Whether the injury report substantiates the allegations made in the FIR.
- Whether the petitioner’s lack of prior criminal record warrants the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109(1), 115(2), 118(2), 126(2), 303(2), 329(3), 3(5), 352, 76
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- outraging modesty
- injury report
- criminal procedure
- Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74670 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-265 Year-2025 Thana- MAJHAULIA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Dinesh Mahto S/o Belash Mahto R/o Village- Gora Semra, Ward No. 14, P.S.-
Majhauliya, District- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar No.3, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 20-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar No.03, learned counsel for
the petitioner and the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection
with Majhauliya P.S. Case No. 265 of 2025 instituted under
Sections 329(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109(1), 76, 303(2), 352
and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita, 2023 lodged on
06.05.2025 by the informant, Rinku Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, in brief, is that on a
petty issue of fight between the children, the elders came in and
the allegation against this petitioner(herein) that he twice gave
farsa blow to the lady-informant. Further, allegation is against
other accused persons of giving ‘lathi’ blow and outraging the
modesty beside taking away the ornaments/cash. This led to the
FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74670 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
do not have criminal antecedent and it was a petty fight between
the children, scuffle took place thereafter between the elders
which led to the exaggerated FIR.
5. In this case, a coordinate bench had called for the
case and the injury report.
6. Learned APP on the other hand with the help of
injury report has shown that injuries are on the parietal bone
near the eyes as also the thumb.
7. Taking into account the aforesaid facts/submissions
and the allegation in the FIR being supported by the injuries, no
case of anticipatory bail is made out.
8. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands
rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U T
Checking your session…