Umesh Mukhiya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37839 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-388 Year-2025 Thana- JOGAPATTI District- West Champaran ====================================================== Umesh Mukhiya Son of Late Shankar Mukhiya Resident of Village- Bagahi, P.S.-Yogapatti, Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sitesh Kashyap, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 17-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 388 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109(1), 351(2), 352, 118(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner has assaulted with sword on the head of the informant's son.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that there is also a counter version of this case, which was filed by the petitioner, and in that case, the petitioner has also received injuries. He also submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37839 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026 2/2 police and prosecution have not disclosed the injuries of the petitioner. He further submits that due to the intervention of well-wishers, the petitioner has filed a compromise petition before the learned trial court in both of the cases. He further submits that from perusal of the injury report, it is clear that the son of the informant has received one lacerated wound on his head. Moreover, a statement has been made in para 3 of the petition that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 15.04.2026.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bettiah, West Champaran in connection with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 388 of 2025.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T