Patna High CourtCR. MISC./68872/2025bail granted

Mohan Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-21Mr. Justice Sourendra Pandey4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68872 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-279 Year-2025 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== Mohan Rai S/o Late Gopal Yadav R/o - Ward No.- 6, Borarahi (Tapra Tola), P.O - Chandpur Bha, P.S - Belaganj, District - Purnea Presently posted as Professor in Ambika Upendera College Murliganj, P.S - Murliganj, District - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Kumar Giri, Adv.

Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv.

Mr. Kishore Saurabh, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 279 of 2025 dated 13.06.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 74, 303(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that his mother namely, Rekha Kumari was posted as Professor in Ambika Upendra College at Murliganj and the In-charge Principal namely, Maheswari Kumar Mahesh misbehaved with her and a scuffle took place between the parties. It is further alleged that the colleague of the Professor

2/4 Maheswari Kumar Mahesh namely, Mohan Rai (petitioner) assaulted the mother of the informant and it is alleged that the petitioner assaulted with dabiya causing injury in the finger of the injured, Rabindra Kumar.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and he was not involved in the said incident. It has further been submitted that admittedly, a scuffle took place between Maheswari Kumar Mahesh and the mother of the informant and the petitioner has no concern whatsoever with the said incident. It has further been submitted that the petitioner caused an incised wound on the middle index finger of Ravindra Kumar is a false and concocted story. However, the petitioner who is a Professor in a college, has no concern to carry the said nature of arms which is said to have been used for causing such injury. It has also been submitted that the injury sustained by the injured were not dangerous to life and it was inflicted on non-vital part of the body. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent.

5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the

3/4 parties and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 279 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure read with corresponding Section 482(2) of BNSS as well as subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.

(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned. (iv) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the

4/4 petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the trial court shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.

8. The application stands allowed.

(Sourendra Pandey, J) Gautam/- U T