Mungeshwer Bind v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16579 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-599 Year-2025 Thana- GHOSI District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.
Mungeshwer Bind Son of Jugeshwar Bind Resident of village- Saidpur, PsGhosi, Dist- Jehanabad 2.
Jugeshwar Bind son of Sakaldeep Bind Resident of village- Saidpur, PsGhosi, Dist- Jehanabad 3.
Modi Bind son of Bilash Bind Resident of village- Saidpur, Ps- Ghosi, DistJehanabad 4.
Raj Ballam Bind Son of Bilash Bind Resident of village- Saidpur, Ps- Ghosi, Dist- Jehanabad 5.
Ramdhar Bind Son of Bilash Bind Resident of village- Saidpur, Ps- Ghosi, Dist- Jehanabad 6.
Ganauri Bind @ Dularchand Bind son of Raj Ballam Bind Resident of village- Saidpur, Ps- Ghosi, Dist- Jehanabad 7.
Kamat Bind Son of Late Sakaldeep Bind Resident of village- Saidpur, PsGhosi, Dist- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mrs. Kumari Sujata Sinha, Advocate :
Mrs. Ragini Kumari, Advocate :
Mr. Sameer Darshan, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Md. Irshad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 06-05-2026 Learned counsel for the petitioners prays for and is allowed withdraw the anticipatory bail application of petitioner no.1, Mungeshwar Bind.
2. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail of petitioner no.1, Mungeshwar Bind stands rejected.
3. Heard Mrs. Kumari Sujata Sinha, learned counsel
2/5 for the petitioners duly assisted by Mrs. Ragini Kumari and Mr. Md. Irshad, learned counsel for the informant beside learned APP representing the State.
4. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Ghosi P.S. Case No. 599 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109, 74 and 3(5) of the B.N.S., lodged on 27.11.2025 by the informant, Lakshminiya Devi.
5. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that firstly petitioner no.1, Mungeshwar Bind tried to outrage her modesty and upon raising alarm, this petitioner gave iron rod blow causing injury to her as the family members came to rescue, allegation of assault against others also. This led to the F.I.R.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that a perusal of the F.I.R. would show that though there is specific allegation against petitioner no.1, Mungeshwar Bind, against others, the omnibus allegation is there. Further, none have criminal antecedent and the injury to others have been found to be simple in nature.
7. Learned APP as also learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer submitting that others also took
3/5 part in the role.
8. Considering the submissions of the parties as also taking into account that omnibus allegation is there and none have criminal antecedent, injuries have been found to be simple in nature, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.
9. Let the petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 namely be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st, Jehanabad, in connection with Ghosi P.S. Case No. 599 of 2025 subject to the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 namely who shall provide official document (Aadhar Card/Voter Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to show his/her bona fide; (ii) the petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 namely
4/5 shall be appearing before the Police Station as and when required for cooperating in the investigation; (iii) the petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 namely 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 bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iv) the petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 namely shall appear before the concerned police station every month for next six months to mark his attendance and at the end of the period a certificate be submitted before the Trial Court failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 namely
5/5 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; (vi) the petitioner nos. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 namely shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T