Patna High Court
Sanful MistriversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to conditions, exercising its discretion under Section 438 CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioners, Sanful Mistri and Munna Kumar, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in an FIR (Alam Nagar PS Case No. 111 of 2025) for offences under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault with deadly weapons and theft. The prosecution alleged that the accused attacked an informant and his family with swords, iron rods and other weapons, causing grievous injuries and stealing cash and jewellery. The petitioners contended that there is a counter‑version of events, that they themselves sustained injuries, that the FIR was lodged after a five‑day delay, and that a compromise petition is pending before the Judicial Magistrate. They assured the court of maintaining peace and not threatening the informant. The court, after considering the lack of specific corroboration and the pending compromise, exercised its power under Section 438 of the CrPC and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to grant anticipatory bail with stringent conditions. The bail order required a bond, sureties, appearance before the trial court, and prohibitions against tampering with witnesses or committing further offences.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 482 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita despite the serious nature of the allegations.
- Whether the pending compromise petition and the alleged lack of corroboration in the FIR justify the grant of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 329(3), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- assault with deadly weapons
- compromise petition
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90303 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-111 Year-2025 Thana- ALAMNAGAR District- Madhepura
======================================================
1. Sanful Mistri Son of Late Anik Mistri Resident Of Village- Alamnagar Ward
no. 15, Ps- Alamnagar, Dist- Madhepura
2. Munna Kumar son of Sanful Mistri Resident Of Village- Alamnagar Ward
no. 15, Ps- Alamnagar, Dist- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pooja Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehended their arrest in
connection with Alam Nagar P.S. Case No. 111 of 2025, F.I.R
dated 07.04.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 329(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 303(2), 352,
351(2), 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, on 02.04.2025 at
about 5:00 P.M., the informant was present at his old house
adjoining the house of Damodar Mistri. On objecting to a goat
being tied on the exit road of his house, the named accused
persons, including the petitioners, allegedly arrived armed with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90303 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
deadly weapons such as sword, dabiya, farsa and iron rod, abused
the informant and assaulted him and his family members. It is
alleged that Nitish Kumar assaulted the informant on the head
with an iron rod and Lalita Devi assaulted his right hand with a
dabiya. When family members intervened, they were also
assaulted with various weapons, causing multiple injuries,
including fracture. It is further alleged that Lalita Devi snatched
Rs. 56,000/- in cash and Sabuja Devi took gold ornaments worth
Rs. 35,000/-. On these allegations, the FIR was lodged.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that there
is a counter version to the incident, and the petitioners are also
said to have received injuries in the said incident, while in the
First Information Report is said to have been lodged after a delay
of almost 5 days, and the injury(s) which are said to have been
received by Bahadur Mistri and Pawan Mistri are simple in
nature, whereas, with respect to the informant – Indal Mistri, the
injury has been found to be grievous in nature. The allegations
levelled against these petitioners are not specific, and there is a
comprise arrived between them and appropriate comprise petition
has already been placed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st
Class, Uda Kishunganj, Madhepura, which is pending
consideration, and it is accordingly said that the parties are
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90303 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
maintaining cordial relation with the intervention of well wishers.
Be that at it may, considering the fact that in case and counter
case, both the parties are said to have received injuries, while the
allegations levelled in the First Information Report is not
corroborated with the injury report and the petitioners are ready to
maintain peace and harmony.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail application.
6. At this stage, the petitioners undertakes to maintain
peace and would not threaten the informant and in case any such
allegations being made before the Police, the same may be
directed to be examined and finding substance in such allegations,
appropriated steps for cancellation of privilege of anticipatory bail
may be reported to the police. Accordingly, this Court is inclined
to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, taking
note of the above consideration.
7. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of
his/her arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period
of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned J.M, 1st Class, Uda Kishunganj, Madhepura in connection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90303 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
with Alamnagar P.S. Case No. 111 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
(i) one of the bailors should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner(s) who shall provide official
document to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) 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/her/their bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) 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;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
abhishekkr/-
U T
Checking your session…