Ramu Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21334 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-193 Year-2025 Thana- MAHISHI District- Saharsa ====================================================== Ramu Mukhiya Son of Gopal Mukhiya Resident of Village- Chatariya, Ward No. 2, P.S.- Maheshi (Jalai O.P.), District- Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-04-2026 Heard Mr. Subhash Kumar Jha,learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 29.01.2026 in connection with Mahishi P.S. Case No. 193 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 11.06.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 126(2), 115(2), 118(2), 109, 303(2), 76 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, it is alleged that the petitioner along with other accused persons assaulted the informant and his family members by means of iron rod and lathi.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21334 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026 2/3 implicated in the present case. It appears from the FIR that due to some petty dispute the present occurrence has taken place. Although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he along with other accused persons assaulted the informant and his family members but the injury report of the injured persons suggest that injury inflicted upon them is simple in nature. It appears from the FIR that date of the occurrence was on 09.06.2025 but the FIR was lodge on 11.06.2025 i.e. after delay of about two days after thought only to falsely implicate the petitioner in the present case and the petitioner is in custody since 29.01.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, petitioner has clean antecedent and injury inflicted upon injured persons is simple in nature, let the petitioner, above named, 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 C.J.M., Saharsa in connection with Mahishi P.S. Case No. 193 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21334 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026 3/3 properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T