Dismissed¶27

Rajan Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC11 Feb 2026CR. MISC./81283/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail refused — regular bail rejected — iron rod assault on head — grievous injuries — informant and son Mokshit Kumar — Muffasil PS Case No. 525 of 2025 — Motihari Mufassil, East Champaran — sections 329(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 308(3), 303(2), 61(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 — parity plea with cross-case co-accused (Tripakar Jha @ Kripakar Jha, Kiran Jha @ Kiran Devi; Cr. Misc. No. 79027 of 2025, order dt. 16.12.2025) not accepted — liberty to renew bail after one year in custody — Patna High Court, Partha Sarthy, J, order dt. 11-02-2026 — Crl. Misc. Nos. 81283 & 81317 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Bail refused; only liberty granted to the petitioners to renew their prayer for bail after completing one year in custody. ¶27

Rajan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail refused; only liberty granted to the petitioners to renew their prayer for bail after completing one year in custody.

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners (Rajan Kumar and Pintu Gupta) are entitled to regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 525 of 2025. +1 more

¶19

Court's answer

The Court found the allegation against the petitioners to be of assault with an iron rod leading to corresponding grievous injuries on the informant side.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

On that basis the Court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and rejected the bail applications.

¶27

Key takeaways

Liberty was granted to the petitioners to renew their prayer for bail after completing one year in custody.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court (Partha Sarthy, J.), order dated 11-02-2026 in Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 81283 and 81317 of 2025, arising out of Muffasil P.S. Case No. 525 of 2025 (Thana Motihari Mufassil, District East Champaran) — regular bail applications of Rajan Kumar and Pintu Gupta, booked under sections 329(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 308(3), 303(2), 61(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — rejected. The FIR alleges that the petitioners, along with three other named accused and 10-12 unknown persons armed with iron rod, farsa, nalkatua etc., entered the informant's house; Pintu Kumar is said to have struck the informant's son Mokshit Kumar with an iron rod on his head and Rajan Kumar the informant with an iron rod on his head. The defence pleaded false implication, case and counter case (the cross-case being earlier in time), absence of any corresponding sharp-weapon injury, no criminal antecedent, custody since 25.8.2025 and 10.8.2025, submission of chargesheet, and bail already granted to cross-case co-accused Tripakar Jha @ Kripakar Jha and Kiran Jha @ Kiran Devi by order dated 16.12.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 79027 of 2025. Finding the allegation against the petitioners to be of assault with an iron rod leading to corresponding grievous injuries on the informant side, the Court declined bail and rejected the applications, granting liberty to renew the prayer for bail after completing one year in custody.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81283 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-525 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Rajan Kumar son of Niranjan Sah @ Niranjan Prasad Sah Resident Of Village- Ward no. 13, Basatpur, Near High School Patpariya Road, PSMufassil, Dist- East champaran

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 81317 of 2025

¶9

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-525 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran

¶10

====================================================== Pintu Gupta Son of Niranjan sah @ Niranjan Prasad sah Resident Of VillageWard no. 13, Village- Basatpur near High School Patpariya Road, PsMufassil, Dist- East Champaran

¶11

The State of Bihar ===================	======	... ... Petitioner/s Versus ... ... Opposite Party/s =============================
Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLA	NEOUS	No. 81283 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s :	Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr.	Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate Prabhat Kumar, Advocate Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :	Ms. Mr. Mr.	Rina Sinha, APP Pratik Mishra, Advocate Vatsal Vishal
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLA	NEOUS	No. 81317 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s :	Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr.	Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate Sanjay Kumar Singh, Advocate Prabhat Kumar, Advocate Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : ===================	Ms. Mr. ======	Rina Sinha, APP Pratik Mishra, Advocate =============================
CORAM: HONOURABL	E MR.	JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY

¶12

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

4 11-02-2026

¶15

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81283 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 2/4

¶17

APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶18

The petitioners have preferred this application for

¶19

grant of regular bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case no.525 of 2025, registered under sections 329(3), 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 109, 308(3), 303(2), 61(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶20

As per the prosecution case, the informant states that the five named accused persons including the two petitioners herein as also 10-12 unknown accused persons came variously armed with iron rod, farsa, nalkatua etc. They entered the house of the informant, started to abuse him and on protest by the informant, the assault took place. Pintu Kumar is said to have assaulted Mokshit Kumar, the son of the informant with an iron rod on his head. Rajan Kumar is said to have assaulted the informant with an iron rod on his head. Besides the petitioners, there is specific allegation of assault against other persons also.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. There is case and counter case between the parties, the case lodged by the petitioners’ side being earlier in time. As against the allegation of assault with sharp cut weapon, no corresponding injury having been found, the very allegation made by the

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81283 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 3/4

¶23

informant in the FIR fails. The petitioners are in custody since 25.8.2025 and 10.8.2025 respectively. Chargesheet has been submitted in the case. They have no criminal antecedent. It is finally submitted that in the counter case, co-accused Tripakar Jha @ Kripakar Jha and Kiran Jha @ Kiran Devi have been enlarged on bail vide order dated 16.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. no.79027 of 2025.

¶24

The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that so far as grant of bail to the aforesaid two persons in the counter case by order dated 16.12.2025 is concerned, the allegation of assault leading to grievous injury on the vital part of the body is not on them. It is further submitted that both the assault attributed to the petitioners herein on the informant and Mokshit Kumar have been found to be on vital part of the body and grievous in nature. As such it is prayed that the application for bail be rejected.

¶25

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, the allegation against the petitioners being of having assaulted with an iron rod leading to corresponding grievous injuries on the informant side, the Court

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81283 of 2025(4) dt.11-02-2026 4/4

¶27

is not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail and the application is rejected.

¶28