Arvind Kumar @ Arvind Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30430 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2022 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Arvind Kumar @ Arvind Mahto S/o Feku Mahto Resident of Vill. and PostDasai, P.S.- Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Md. Sadre Alam S/o Md. Husaini Resident of Vill.- Dasai, P.S.- Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dwij Raj, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 09-05-2025 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 189 of 2022, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 365, 366A and 342/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. This is the second attempt made on behalf of the petitioner, as earlier his prayer for bail came to be rejected by this Court vide order dated 22.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No52050 of 2024.

4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner contended that since the prayer for bail of the petitioner has already been turned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30430 of 2025(2) dt.09-05-2025 2/3 down on merit(s) and, as such, no submission is being made with respect to the merit(s) of the case. However, this fact cannot be ignored that while negating the prayer for bail of the petitioner, he was accorded liberty to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge(s). Now, charge(s) has already been framed against the petitioner. In support of the aforesaid contention, a copy of the charge(s) sheet has been placed on record as Annexure-3 to the bail application. It is lastly contended that now the petitioner has been incarcerated since 25.01.2024 having fair antecedent and, as such, more than a year has elapsed.

5. Learned Advocate for the State opposed the bail application.

6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the observation made by this Court and the fact that the charge(s) has already been framed and now the petitioner has been incarcerated since for over a period of one year, let the petitioner, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Sessions Judge-VIcum-Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sitamarhi in connection with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30430 of 2025(2) dt.09-05-2025 3/3 Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 189 of 2022, subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be the close relatives of the petitioner with further conditions which are as follows:- (i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of the trial.

(ii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.

(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial. (iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.

(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U T