Dhananjay Mahto @ Dhananjay Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31179 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2012 Thana- MEHUSH District- Sheikhpura ====================================================== Dhananjay Mahto @ Dhananjay Prasad, S/o Late Hardev Mahto @ Hardev Prasad, R/o Village- Murarpur, P.S.- Korma, District- Sheikhpura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sheo Nandan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 21-05-2025 Heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Mehus P.S. Case No. 4 of 2012, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

3. The police on a tip off assemblage of miscreants conducted raid and apprehended one Rahul @ Manish Kumar; the other accused persons succeeded in fleeing away. In course of search, one country made loaded pistol and one live cartridge were recovered from the possession of co-accused. The apprehended co-accused disclosed the name of his accomplice including the petitioner.

4. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that save and except the confession, that too

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31179 of 2025(2) dt.21-05-2025 2/2 before the police, there is no material suggesting the complicity of the petitioner in crime. The petitioner in order to earn his livelihood, resides outside the State and has nothing to do with the alleged occurrence and later on, when the petitioner came to know, he approached this Court.

5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits that beside two criminal antecedent as has been disclosed in paragraph no. 3, the petitioner has been evading from the law for over a decade.

6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the petitioner has been evading from law for over a period of twelve years, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, accordingly the present application stands rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, the prayer for bail of the petitioner shall be considered without being prejudice by the order of this Court.

(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U T