Santlal Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28670 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2025 Thana- JOGBANI District- Araria ====================================================== Santlal Mandal S/O late Lakhicharan Mandal R/O Vill.- Jhokhran, Ward no. 4, P.S.- Jogbani, Dist.- Araria.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Gopal Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 28-07-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Jogbani P.S. Case No. 155 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 121, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 324(4), 303(2), 352 and 351(2) of the BNS, 2023.

3. The Investigating Officer of the case, in compliance of the order passed by the learned Co-ordinate Bench dated 14.07.2026, is present in the Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and from perusal of the FIR, it would manifest that the date of occurrence is 24.09.2025 and the FIR came to be instituted on 08.12.2025. It is next submitted that petitioner is alleged to have assaulted Anil by sword causing injury on head and the injury has been opined to be grievous in nature, but then it is submitted that petitioner was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28670 of 2026(4) dt.28-07-2026 2/2 falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant, as such, the FIR came to be instituted after a delay of more than two months. It is further submitted that police after investigation submitted final form exonerating the petitioner of the allegation as alleged in the FIR.

5. On query of the Court from the Investigating Officer of the case as to whether final form has been submitted or not, it is submitted that final form has been submitted, on which the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that till date cognizance has not been taken. It is next submitted that since final form has been submitted and cognizance has not been taken, as such, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the anticipatory bail application with liberty to the petitioner to file afresh, if need arises.

6. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail application stands dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.

7. The personal appearance of the Investigating Officer of the case is dispensed with.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T