Pintu Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11398 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-323 Year-2023 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa ====================================================== Pintu Mandal S/O Dewaki Mandal R/O Village- Paharpur, Ward No. 16, P.SPatarghat, Distt.- Saharsa. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 02-05-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial no.183 of 2024 (arising out of Sour Bazar P.S. Case no.323 of 2023) registered under sections 25(1-A), 25(1-AA), 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35 and 25(1a) of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that on receiving secret information, a raid was conducted at the house of the petitioner. Three accused persons including the petitioner managed to escape. On search of the house of the petitioner it is stated that large number of articles including arms, ammunition and various arms in the process of being manufactured and articles for use in the manufacture of arms as detailed in the FIR, were recovered.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11398 of 2025(3) dt.02-05-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. No incriminating article has been recovered either from his possession or from his house. The cause of his false implication is his antecedent. Inspite of the petitioner having remained in custody since 25.6.2023 and charge having been framed in the learned trial Court, as per the instructions received, no witness has been examined on behalf of the prosecution. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.

6. A report was called for from the learned trial Court. As per the report received, charge has been framed and the case is fixed for prosecution evidence in which summons for appearance and production of prosecution witnesses have been issued by the Court but the prosecution has not produced and examined any witness yet.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner, the petitioner being in custody for 1 year 10 months since 25.6.2023 and charge having been framed in the learned trial Court, the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11398 of 2025(3) dt.02-05-2025 3/3 connection with Sessions Trial no.183 of 2024 (arising out of Sour Bazar P.S. Case no.323 of 2023) on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District and Additional Sessions Judge II, Saharsa.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/- U T