Ram Pravesh Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25897 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-170 Year-2025 Thana- Chhaudahi District- Begusarai ====================================================== Ram Pravesh Mahto Son of Late Domi Mahto Resident of Village- Pir Nagar, P.S.- Chhaurahi, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in the typed copy of the FIR.

3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chhaurahi P.S. Case No. 170 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 103(1) and 27 of the Arms Act.

4. The petitioner and others are named in the FIR as having killed the deceased.

5. The petitioner is in custody since 11.12.2025.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the assailant of the deceased is one Brajesh Kumar and not the petitioner though the petitioner is named in the FIR. He further submits that during investigation it has come that aforesaid

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25897 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026 2/2 Brajesh Kumar and one unknown criminal had killed the deceased.

7. Learned counsel for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the petitioner is a part of conspiracy of killing the deceased and for committing murder, he was also involved in procuring the murder weapon.

8. From the materials available on record, it appears that the petitioner has conspired to kill the deceased along with Brajesh Kumar and others and in furtherance of the conspiracy, the deceased was killed.

9. Considering the above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

10. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

11. It is, however, clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express any opinion on the merits of the case.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T