Amarjeet Mahto @ Amarjeet Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC23 Jul 2026CR. MISC./50486/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Amarjeet Mahto @ Amarjeet Kumar; bail granted; Saraiya P.S. Case No. 582 of 2024; Muzaffarpur; Sections 109 & 3(5) Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023; Section 27 Arms Act; firing at Brezza car; previous enmity; custody since 20.03.2026; four criminal antecedents; general and omnibus allegation; no recovery; no injury; bail bonds Rs. 15,000 with two sureties; conditions: family bailor, trial attendance, no tampering; Patna High Court; CR. MISC. No.50486 of 2026; Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra; 23-07-2026.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the petitioner in connection with Saraiya P.S. Case No. 582 of 2024 on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions (one bailor an own/close family member; attendance on every trial date; no tampering with evidence or witnesses). ¶¶22

Amarjeet Mahto @ Amarjeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, named in Saraiya P.S. Case No. 582 of 2024 (Sections 109 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act), should be released on bail.

¶¶14

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period of custody of the petitioner, the Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶¶21

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner is to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below/concerned Court, subject to conditions: one bailor to be an own/close family member; appearance on each and every trial date and no absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient cause; and no tampering with evidence or witnesses during the trial, failing which the Trial Court may cancel the bail bonds.

¶¶22

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Miscellaneous (Bail) — Patna High Court, single-judge bench (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J), order dated 23-07-2026: Bail granted to Amarjeet Mahto @ Amarjeet Kumar in Saraiya P.S. Case No. 582 of 2024, District Muzaffarpur, instituted for offences under Sections 109 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Prosecution case: chase and firing at informant's Brezza car due to previous enmity. Petitioner in custody since 20.03.2026 with four criminal antecedents disclosed; counsel urged absence of specific allegation (general and omnibus allegation only), no recovery from conscious possession, and no injury to anyone. Granting bail on consideration of facts, circumstances and custody period, the Court ordered release on bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- with two like sureties, subject to conditions including a family bailor, attendance at every trial date, and no tampering with evidence or witnesses, with liberty to the Trial Court to cancel bail bonds on violation.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50486 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-582 Year-2024 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Amarjeet Mahto @ Amarjeet Kumar Son of Jamadar Mahto @ Jamdar Mahto Resident of Village- Deoriya, P.S.- Ribilganj, District- Saran (Chapra)

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravinesh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

2 23-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

¶13

for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Saraiya P.S. Case No. 582 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 109 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶15

The prosecution case, in short, is that due to previous enmity, the petitioner and other accused, along with unknown associates, chased the informant’s Brezza car on motorcycles and indiscriminately fired at it with the intention to murder the informant and his companion while they were travelling to attend a wedding.

¶16

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50486 of 2026(2) dt.23-07-2026 2/3

¶18

that the petitioner is in custody since 20.03.2026. Petitioner bears four (4) criminal antecedents, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

¶19

It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. From perusal of the FIR, it would reveal that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner, rather the same is against other co-accused person. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner specifically submits that no one sustained injury during alleged occurrence.

¶20

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

¶21

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and period of custody of the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶22

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Saraiya P.S. Case No. 582 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50486 of 2026(2) dt.23-07-2026 3/3

¶24

(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

¶25

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial and shall not remain absent on two consecutive dates without sufficient cause.

¶26

(III) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence or the witnesses during the trial.

¶27

If any of the above conditions are violated, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

¶28

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶29

Raj Kishore/-

¶30

U T

Amarjeet Mahto @ Amarjeet Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amarjeet Mahto @ Amarjeet Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Samir Kumar @ Sumir Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Karan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sujeet Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Madho Kumar @ Madhav Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar