Mukesh Kumar @ Laddu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26859 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-612 Year-2024 Thana- MASAUDHI District- Patna ====================================================== Mukesh Kumar @ Laddu S/O Dinesh Mahto R/O Vill.- Sohgi, P.S.- Gaurichak, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rudal Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 29-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Masaudhi P.S. Case No. 612 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 103 and 61 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3.
As per prosecution case, the accusation against the petitioner is of being involved in the murder of her husband in a pre-planned manner.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case with false and frivolous allegations. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26859 of 2025(4) dt.29-08-2025 2/3 namely, Priyanka Kumari. It is submitted that from perusal of confessional statement of co-accused, it appears that specific allegation is against co-accused, namely, Ajay Sahni @ Baba. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is alleged that the co-accused, namely, Priyanka Kumari, in connivance with other co-accused, got her husband killed so as to sell off the properties of her husband to clear the loan incurred by her to the tune of Rs. 1.50 crores but, nothing has come in the investigation as to sale of which property resulted in loss to her and, thus, the motive alleged and introduced is totally vague and far fetched for the alleged offence. The present case is based purely on the circumstantial evidence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious/physical possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no direct or specific allegation against the petitioner rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in judicial custody since 04.02.2025 without any rhymes or reason. Other co-accused has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 17-03-2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 13916 of 2025.
5.
On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26859 of 2025(4) dt.29-08-2025 3/3 vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner, stating that the offence alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature.
6.
Having heard rival contention of both the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, the period of custody of the petitioner, the petitioner having no criminal antecedent and claim based on parity, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Masaudhi P.S. Case No. 612 of 2024, subject to the following conditions;
(I) One of the bailor(s) shall be the own/close family members of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and in the event of failure on two consecutive dates without sufficient reasons, his bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled by the court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T