Mintush Kumar @ Minta @ Mantu Kumar @ Mintush v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30146 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-702 Year-2023 Thana- FATUA District- Patna ====================================================== Mintush Kumar @ Minta @ Mantu Kumar @ Mintush S/o Munarik Singh R/o Village- Niyazipur, P.S.- Fatuha, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Mickey Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Chandra Bhushan Prasad ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Fatuha P.S. Case No. 702/2023 for the offences punishable under section 302/34/120(B) of the Indian Panal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of five cases and is in custody since 18.12.2025, it is next submitted that from perusal of allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence but alleges that his son was killed by the named accused persons including the petitioner. The learned counsel submits that no doubt son of the informant was killed but then allegation of firing is not specific since informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. It is also submitted that this court granted privilege of anticipatory bail to Ram Suhawan Gop in Cr. Misc. No 43961 of 2024 by order dated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30146 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026 2/2 21.08.2024 for which the learned A.P.P also submits that Ram Suhawan Gop was a senior citizen and was a person with clean antecedent but petitioner has antecedent of five cases.
4. At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that Mithlesh Kumar has approached this court seeking bail by filling Cr. Misc. No. 79286 of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 25.11.2025 with the condition that petitioner would be released after framing of charge, if not already framed. It is also submitted that even Mithlesh Kumar has antecedent of four cases .
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and submits that since petitioner has antecedent of five cases and if privilege of regular bail is granted to the petitioner, the petitioner may abscond.
6. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Therefore, the prayer for bail of this petitioner is rejected.
7. However petitioner would have at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge, if not already framed. (Satyavrat Verma, J) sanjeev/-vikram/ U