Sambhu Mehta v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90126 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-233 Year-2024 Thana- PURAINI District- Madhepura ====================================================== Sambhu Mehta S/o Late Mahendra Mehta R/o Village - Madhatpur Basa, Ward No. 13, P.S - Alamnagar, District - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Dr Sanjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Vinod Shanker Modi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-02-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner antecedent of twelve cases and the informant alleges that his brother a Contractor was returning home on a Maruti car driven by Pushpam Kumar (son of the informant), when six unknown accused persons intercepted them and took his brother out of the car and shot him dead, thus alleges that based on suspicion that Pappu Chaudhary, Amit Sah along with other accused got his brother killed.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90126 of 2025(2) dt.06-02-2026 2/3 the FIR was against unknown and the petitioner transpired in the confessional statement of Shiyaram Mehta, who had antecedent of 17 cases. It is next submitted that Shiyaram Mehta has been granted the privilege of regular bail by an order dated 26.09.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.48239 of 2025. It is further submitted that petitioner is in custody since 19.08.2025 and charge-sheet has been submitted. It is thus submitted that when the accused in whose confession the name of the petitioner transpired has been granted the privilege of regular bail, the case of the petitioner is on a better footing. It is also submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the bail application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, the petitioner, above-named, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Puraini P. S. Case No. 233 of 2024, subject to the conditions that one of the bauilor of the petitioner shall be his wife Chandani Devi.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90126 of 2025(2) dt.06-02-2026 3/3
7. The application stands allowed.
8. However, it is made clear that if the learned trial court comes to a conclusion that petitioner after his release is trying to delay the framing of charge or after framing of charge is trying to delay the trial in both the conditions, the learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner. (Satyavrat Verma, J) vikash/- U T