Patna High CourtCR. MISC./76879/2025bail rejected

Kari Mahto @ Kari Lal v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-21Mr. Justice Partha Sarthy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76879 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2024 Thana- HATHIDAH District- Patna ====================================================== Kari Mahto @ Kari Lal, S/o Tulsi Mahto, R/o Village- Ganga Prasad Anarpur, Bind Toli, P.S - Chakiya, District - Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate Mr. Shamir Mehra, Advocate Mr. Rajeev Ranjan Ray, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 21-01-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Hathidah P.S. Case no.9 of 2024 registered under sections 307, 341, 323, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, as a result of firing resorted to by the petitioner, it is stated that the father of the informant sustained firearm injury on his back.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case because of money dispute between the parties which would be evident from the contents of the F.I.R. itself. In any case, the injury has been found to be simple in nature. The petitioner is in custody since

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76879 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026 2/2 29.7.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted in the case.

5. The prayer for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for the State stating that the injury report confirms the father of the informant having sustained firearm injury. However, it is admitted that the nature of injury has been found to be simple in nature.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in the F.I.R. of having resorted to firing on the father of the informant together with the corresponding firearm injury having been found on the injured, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months.

(Partha Sarthy, J) avinash/- U T