Arun Mehta v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15327 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2024 Thana- PURAINI District- Madhepura ====================================================== Arun Mehta Son of Damodar Mehta Resident of Village - Dhaneshwar Triveni Tola, P.S. - Chousa (Fulout) O.P., District - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Jiya Verma, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 09-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Puraini P.S. Case No. 233 of 2024 registered for the offences under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The prosecution story in short is that while the brother of the informant who was a contractor was returning home, six miscreants fired several rounds upon him resulting in his death. The informant suspected that contractors namely Pappu Choudhary and Amit Shah alongwith other miscreants have committed the said murder.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to dirty village politics. He is not named in the FIR. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has been made
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15327 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025 2/3 accused only on suspicion and his name has transpired merely on confessional statement of co-accused Siya Ram Mahta before police which has no evidenciary value. Nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. Barring confessional statement there is nothing to connect the petitioner with alleged incident. It is also submitted that the named accused person namely Pappu Choudhary has been enlarged on bail by the learned Court below. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he has been in custody since 27.12.2024.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submits that from perusal of para 27 of the case diary, it appears that this petitioner in criminal conspiracy with five others has committed the murder of the deceased.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and taking into account that barring confessional statement there is nothing to connect the petitioner with alleged incident and he has been in custody since 27.12.2024, let the petitioner, above named, be enlarged on bail 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 ACJM-I, Uda-Kishunganj in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15327 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025 3/3 connection Puraini P.S. Case No. 233 of 2024 subject to the conditions that One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be her close relative.
a. The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
b. In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail and if the prosecution is found involvement of the petitioner in similar nature of offence, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be canceled by the Court concerned.
c. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) Prakash/- U