Patna High CourtCR. MISC./76393/2025bail rejected

Jay Kumar Mandal @ Jay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-23Mr. Justice Jitendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76393 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-214 Year-2025 Thana- BHARGAMA District- Araria ====================================================== Jay Kumar Mandal @ Jay Kumar, S/O Arun Mandal Resident of villageTharua Patti, Ward No. 12, Police Station Bhargama, Dist.- Araria. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Kumar Ravish, Advocate For the State :

Ms. Madhuri Lata, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, apprehending his arrest, in connection with Bhargama P.S. Case No. 214 Year-2025, dated 18.06.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 74, 303(2), 352 and 3(5) of the B.N.S, 2023.

3. As per allegation, the Informant was assaulted by the Petitioner by khanti on her head, resulting into wound on her forehead and bleeding therefrom when she protested against cutting a banana plant. There is a corresponding injury report, as per which, there is a lacerated wound on the left side of her forehead measuring approx 2 cm x 1⁄4 cm x skin deep. Moreover, opinion of the Doctor has been reserved.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76393 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that even as per the FIR there is no repeated assault by the Petitioner and as per the case diary, there was altercation in the family members of the two sides which led to this occurrence.

5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.

6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents.

7. However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioner for bail.

8. Considering the fact that an innocent lady has been assaulted by the Petitioner without any rhyme or reason, causing injury on her forehead, which is vital part of the body, I am not persuaded to enlarge the Petitioner on bail.

9. The bail petition stands rejected, accordingly. (Jitendra Kumar, J.) Chandan/- U T