Patna High Court
CR. MISC./26391/2026 of Bhikhari Mahto Vs The State of Bihar on 8 July 2026
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26391 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2025 Thana- Kumarbagh District- West Champaran ====================================================== Bhikhari Mahto Son of Gaya Mahto Resident of Village- Kurwa Mathiya, P.S.- Kumarbag,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26391 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2025 Thana- Kumarbagh District- West Champaran ======================================================
Bhikhari Mahto Son of Gaya Mahto Resident of Village- Kurwa Mathiya, P.S.- Kumarbag, District- West Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s
:
Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
08-07-2026 Heard Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Tapeshwar Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 28.07.2025 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 932 of 2025 arising out of Kumarbag P.S. Case No. 145 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 27.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 80 and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, this petitioner along with other accused persons have killed the daughter of the informant over non-fulfillment of demand of Rs. 3 lakhs.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He has been made accused Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26391 of 2026(3) dt.08-07-2026
merely on the ground that he is husband of the deceased. The allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of material available on record and the case diary has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it appears from the record of the case diary that the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized on 18.04.2025 and the alleged occurrence took place on 26.07.2025 i.e, within a period of three months. Apart from that it appears from the postmortem report that number of ante-mortem injuries were found on the body of the deceased.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 932 of 2025 arising out of Kumarbag P.S. Case No. 145 of 2025 pending in the court of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Bettiah, District- West Chamaparan.
7. Prayer is refused.
Vanisha/- (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) U T