Patna High Court
Tulasi Kumar Mukhiya @ Tulshi Mukhiya @ Tulsi MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to Tulsi and Rudal Mukhiya with conditions, but denied anticipatory bail to Umesh Mukhiya.
Summary
The petitioners, Tulsi Kumar Mukhiya, Rudal Mukhiya and Umesh Mukhiya, were implicated in a FIR (PS Yogapatti Case No. 388 of 2025) for multiple offences under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 351(2), 352, 118(1) and 3(5) of the Bihar Penal Code, arising from a drunken assault. The prosecution alleged that Tulsi and Rudal assaulted the informant with simple injuries, while Umesh inflicted a grievous injury on a person named Bullet. The petitioners sought anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Court noted that the injuries caused by Tulsi and Rudal were simple and that they had no prior criminal record, whereas Umesh's injury was grievous, justifying denial of his bail. Consequently, the Court granted anticipatory bail to Tulsi and Rudal with stringent conditions, and rejected the bail application of Umesh.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners given the nature of injuries alleged and their criminal antecedents
- Whether the presence of a grievous injury justifies denial of anticipatory bail under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 Cr.P.C.
- assault
- grievous injury
- simple injury
- criminal antecedent
- Bihar Penal Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89937 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-388 Year-2025 Thana- JOGAPATTI District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Tulasi Kumar Mukhiya @ Tulshi Mukhiya @ Tulsi Mukhiya S/o Late
Shankar Mukhiya R/o vill- Ward no 4, Bagahi, PS- Yogapatti, District- West
Champaran
2. Rudal Mukhiya S/o Late Shankar Mukhiya R/o vill- Ward no 4, Bagahi, PS-
Yogapatti, District- West Champaran
3. Umesh Mukhiya S/o Late Shankar Mukhiya R/o vill- Ward no 4, Bagahi,
PS- Yogapatti, District- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Kumar Gupta, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection
with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 388 of 2025 for the offence
registered under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 351(2), 352,
118(1), 3(5) of BNS.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that Rudal Mukhiya in a drunken state came out with a farsa
and assaulted the informant, Shivpujan Mukhiya. When his son,
Bullet came to rescue, allegation is that Umesh Mukhiya
assaulted on the head having sword in his hand. As Dilip Kumar
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89937 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/4
came to save him, Tulsi Mukhiya assaulted by iron rod while
Rudal Mukhiya’s wife, Pratima Devi assaulted the informant’s
son. They were taken to the Primary Health Center which
followed the FIR.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submit that
injury reports are part of the petition and the injury report of
Dilip Kumar and Shivpujan have been found to be simple in
nature. The role of assault has been assigned to Tulsi Mukhiya
and Rudal Mukhiya. He, however, concede that so far as the
injury given by Umesh to Bullet is concerned, it has been found
to be grievous in nature.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand,
opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail submitting that at least
one of the injury has been found to be grievous in nature.
6. Taking into account the submissions of the parties
so far as the anticipatory bail application of petitioner no. 3,
Umesh Mukhiya is concerned, considering the injury given by
him to Bullet has been found to be grievous, no case is made
out, his anticipatory bail application stands rejected.
7. Regarding petitioner nos. 1 and 2, namely, Tulsi
Mukhiya and Rudal Mukhiya, though allegation is there, the
same have been found to be simple in nature, these two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89937 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/4
petitioners have no criminal antecedent, in that background, this
Court is inclined to grant them the anticipatory bail with
conditions.
8. Let the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, namely, Tulsi
Mukhiya and Rudal Mukhiya in the event of arrest or surrender
within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of the
order, shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail of
Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Bettiah, West Chamaparan in connection with
Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 388 of 2025 subject to condition as laid
down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
members/relatives of the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, namely, Tulsi
Mukhiya and Rudal Mukhiya, who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card, PAN Card, Driving License, Voter ID)
to show his bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, namely, Tulsi Mukhiya
and Rudal Mukhiya shall appear on each and every date before
the Trial court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates
without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond
by the Trial court itself;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89937 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
4/4
(iii) the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, namely, Tulsi
Mukhiya and Rudal Mukhiya shall appear before the concerned
police station every month for next six months to mark
attendance and at the end of the period, the certificate be
submitted to the Court;
(iv) the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, namely, Tulsi Mukhiya
and Rudal Mukhiya shall in no way try to induce or promise or
threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which
the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the
bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner nos. 1 and 2, namely, Tulsi Mukhiya
and Rudal Mukhiya shall desist from committing any criminal
offence again failing which the State shall be at liberty to take
steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…