Patna High Court
Uttam KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted in view of the specific allegation of assault leading to death and the seriousness of the offences.
Summary
The petitioner, Uttam Kumar, sought regular bail in a case involving alleged assault, robbery, and the death of the informant's brother. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, as part of an unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons, struck the brother with an iron rod, causing a fatal head injury, and also participated in assaulting other family members and theft of Rs. 50,000. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that the incident was a spontaneous reaction to verbal abuse, and that there was no intent to kill, emphasizing his lack of prior criminal record. The State and the informant's counsel highlighted the specific allegation of grievous assault leading to death, supported by the post‑mortem report. After considering the seriousness of the charges and the absence of fresh grounds for bail, the court denied the bail application, ordering the trial to be concluded promptly.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite allegations of assault causing death and other serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103, 109, 115(2), 127(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2), 323, 324(2), 351(2-4)
Subjects
- bail
- assault
- homicide
- unlawful assembly
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- grave injury
- trial acceleration
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.985 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2024 Thana- Mohanpur District- Purnia
======================================================
Uttam Kumar, Son of Late Pradip Mandal @ Boni, R/o Village - Lalganj, P.S.
- Mohanpur, Dist. - Purnea.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Pooja Prasad, Adv.
For the Informant : Mr. Rajnish Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the State : Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 18-03-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. This is second attempt on behalf of the petitioner
for grant of bail. Earlier his application for bail was rejected by
this Court vide order dated 01.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
444 of 2025.
3. The petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in
connection with Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 71 of 2024 registered
for the offence(s) punishable under Section(s) 191(2), 191(3),
190, 127(1), 115(2), 109, 324(2), 323, 303(2), 103 and 351(2-4)
of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).
4. As per the prosecution case, while the informant
along with his brother and father was sitting at their door, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.985 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
2/4
neighbours started abusing the informant and his family
members and when the informant protested, the co-accused
persons threatened the informant. It has been alleged that after
thirty minutes, all of a sudden, all the accused persons including
the petitioner, forming an unlawful assembly with common
object and armed with deadly weapons, came there and started
assaulting the informant and his family members. It has further
been alleged that during the said assault, the petitioner, namely,
Uttam Kumar, gave an iron rod blow over the head of the
brother of the informant, namely, Bisheshar Mandal, with an
intention to kill him on account of which the brother of the
informant sustained injury on his head. It has also been alleged
that the co-accused/Bindeshwari Mandal assaulted the
informant’s father by means of lathi, who also sustained injury
on his head. Both the injured persons fell down unconscious. It
has been alleged that the co-accused/Bablu Mandal gave lathi
blow on the head of the informant and, thereafter, the accused
persons entered into the house of the informant, damaged the
household articles and robbed cash of Rs. 50,000/- and,
thereafter, they all fled away. It has next been alleged that the
brother and the father of the informant were taken to the
Referral Hospital, Rupauli from where the Doctor referred them
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.985 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
3/4
to Sadar Hospital, Purnea, however the informant admitted his
brother and father to a private Hospital, but on 31.07.2024, the
brother of the informant, namely, Bisheshar Mandal, succumbed
to the injuries.
5. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that he has falsely been implicated in this case and no such
incident as alleged has occurred and the allegation of assault is
on more than one person. It has further been submitted that the
incident occurred on account of verbal abuse made on behalf of
the informant and others upon which the petitioner and others
retaliated and in the spur of the moment, the incident occurred.
It has next been submitted that admittedly, there is no repeated
blow and, therefore, the intention to kill is not present and as per
the report only two witnesses out of eight witnesses have been
examined till date. It has lastly been submitted that the
petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since
21.08.2024.
6. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State
as also the learned counsel for the informant, while vehemently
opposing the prayer for bail, have submitted that there is
specific allegation of assault upon the petitioner, causing
grievous head injury to the brother of the informant, who later
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.985 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
4/4
succumbed to the said head injury. The learned counsel for the
informant, pointing towards the post-mortem report, submits
that the external injuries found on the body of the deceased
corroborates with the allegations leveled in the F.I.R and,
moreover, the cause of death has been stated to be head injury
caused by hard and blunt substance.
7. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances
of the case and taking note of the fact that there is specific
allegation upon the petitioner to have assaulted the brother of
the informant on his head, leading to his death, and finding no
fresh grounds, this Court is not inclined to grant the petitioner
the privilege of regular bail.
8. The prayer for bail is, accordingly, rejected.
9. The application stands dismissed.
10. It is, however, observed that the learned Trial
Court shall take efforts to conclude the trial at the earliest,
preferably within a year.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…