Amit Kumar Mehta v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34608 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-581 Year-2023 Thana- NARPATGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== Amit Kumar Mehta S/o Late Sadanand Mehta, R/o Posdaha, Ward No. 10, P.S.- Narpatganj, District - Araria ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar Mandal, Advocate For the State :
Ms. Sharda Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Narpatganj P.S. Case No. 581 of 2023 dated 07.10.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363 and 365/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per allegation, the son of the informant has been kidnapped by the petitioner and other co-accused.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that after investigation, charge-sheet has been submitted against two co-accused, namely, Sonu Kumar Mandal and Anjula Devi under Sections 304 and 201
2/4 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and after supplementary investigation, charge-sheet has been also submitted against the present petitioner under Sections 304 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. He further submits that charge has already been framed and two other co-accused have already been enlarged on regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
5. He further submits that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 05.03.2025.
6. It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.
7. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has moved this Court earlier for anticipatory bail, which has been rejected.
8. However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail.
9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is allowed, directing the petitioner, abovenamed, to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned Court
3/4 below in connection with Narpatganj P.S. Case No. 581 of 2023, on the following conditions:
(i) However, it is cautioned that if the statement of learned counsel for the petitioner regarding framing of charge comes out to be false, the bail bonds of the petitioner shall stand cancelled and learned Trial Court will not require to take bail bond.
(ii) The petitioner will make himself available for interrogation by a police officer/court as and when required. (iii) The petitioner will undertake that investigation/trial will not get hampered on account of his absence or non-cooperation. He must be available to the police or the court whenever his presence is required. (iv) The petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer. (v) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioner has any criminal antecedents, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner after hearing him and getting satisfied that the petitioner has
4/4 concealed his criminal antecedents despite his knowledge of the same.
(vi) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Jitendra Kumar, J.) ravishankar/- U T