Arjun Mahto Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Arjun Mahto Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner directed to be released/enlarged on bail in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 212 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, charged under Ss. 363, 342, 365 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code in Ballia P.S. Case No. 212 of 2021, should be enlarged on regular bail. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, the court was inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and directed his release on bail in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 212 of 2021 upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Patna High Court (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J), oral order dt. 17-10-2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 50317 of 2025, arising out of Ballia (Baliya) P.S. Case No. 212 of 2021, District Begusarai. Petitioner Arjun Mahto, booked under Ss. 363, 342, 365 and 34 IPC, allegedly kidnapped the informant's son with others to pressurise compromise of an earlier murder case; the victim was recovered during investigation and, by his Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement, implicated the petitioner and others of kidnapping, confinement and threats. Petitioner's counsel pleaded false implication, contended that apart from the Section 164 statement no other material linked the petitioner, adduced parity with co-accused Akhilesh Mahto (bailed by a co-ordinate Bench vide order dt. 10.08.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 40917 of 2023) and noted custody since 11.01.2025; the APP opposed citing three criminal antecedents. Although the APP pointed to the antecedents, the court, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, enlarged the petitioner on bail on a bond of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the CJM, Begusarai.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50317 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2021 Thana- BALIYA District- Begusarai

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

Arjun Mahto S/o Ghoghal Mahto @ Ghogho Mahto Vill.- Paharpur, PSBallia, Distt.- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shailendra Kumar, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

3 17-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 363, 342, 365 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the petitioner along with others kidnapped the son of the informant to pressurize him into compromising an earlier murder case. During the course of investigation, the victim was recovered and he has gave his statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. wherein he stated that he had been kidnapped by the petitioner and others, kept in confinement, and threatened to compromise the said murder case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50317 of 2025(3) dt.17-10-2025 2/2

connection with the present case. It is further submitted that save and except the statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., there is no other material against this petitioner to implicate him. It is further submitted that similarly situated co-accused, namely, Akhilesh Mahto has been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 10.08.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 40917 of 2023. The case of the petitioner stands on similar footing. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 11.01.2025.

5. Learned APP appearing for the state has opposed the prayer of regular bail stating that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Ballia P.S. Case No. 212 of 2021 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

Jagdish/-

U T