Mithilesh Mandal v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48209 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2024 Thana- KRITYANAND NAGAR DistrictPurnia ====================================================== Mithilesh Mandal S/o- Dinesh Mandal @ Dina Mandal Resident of VillageDhima PS- Banmankhi, Dist- Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bhola Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 29-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case in connection with K. Nagar P.S. Case No. 220 of 2024 dated 22.07.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 103, 61(2) and 238 of the B.N.S and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 21.07.2024 at about 12.30 hours, the informant's husband namely Md. Hussain Ansari had gone out from his house along with his friends namely Prince Kumar and Dilip Samrat by his vehicle. At about 21.00 hours, the informant contacted with her husband from mobile and she heard that her husband was telling to the coaccused, Dilip Samrat and Prince Kumar that he has to reach at
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48209 of 2025(2) dt.29-08-2025 2/3 his house at 7 A.M. for urgent work. At about 11 hours, when the informant went to the house of the co-accused, Prince Kumar to enquire about her husband then he did not give any satisfactory answer to her and fled away from his house. Thereafter, the informant received a call on mobile from unknown person regarding the dead body of her husband lying in a vehicle at Baghmara. The informant reached there and saw the dead body of her husband. It is alleged that the accused persons named in the F.I.R. have committed murder of her husband with firearms under a conspiracy.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner is not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioner has sprung up in the confessional statement of the co-accused, Dilip Samrat. It is further submitted that there is no specific overt act against the petitioner. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged offence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Earlier
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48209 of 2025(2) dt.29-08-2025 3/3 the regular bail application of the co-accused, Prince Kumar @ Kamal Prince Kumar has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 24.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 71036 of 2024.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Purnea in connection with K. Nagar P.S. Case No. 220 of 2024, subject to conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., with further condition:- (i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T