Umesh Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72772 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-402 Year-2025 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran ====================================================== UMESH PRASAD S/O DHRUV MAHTO @ DHRUV PRASAD R/O VILLAGE - SURAJPUR, PAKHANAHA, POLICE STATION -SRINAGAR, DISTRICT- WEST CHAMPARAN ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 402 of 2025 instituted for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that on demanding the balance sale consideration of land, the informant and his nephew were abused and assaulted by the co-accused, and Umesh Prasad, petitioner herein, allegedly stabbed the nephew with a knife causing injuries.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to previous land dispute between the parties. Learned counsel for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72772 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026 2/2 the petitioner submits that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. The only specific allegation agianst the petitioner is that he stabbed the informant's nephew with knife. It is further submitted that the informant's nephew sustained grievous injuries. There is case and counter case between the parties. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 24.07.2025 and has one criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, case and counter-case between the parties as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 402 of 2025.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T