Patna High Court

Chhatish Mahto @ Chhatis Mahto @ Chhatis Kumar @ Satish Kumar @ Chhatish KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 10 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

Bail was denied to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Chhatish Mahto, was charged with murder under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and with an offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleges that Mahto, together with co‑accused, murdered the husband of an informant in a land‑dispute context. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, pointing out the absence of an independent eyewitness and that CCTV footage only showed him riding on a motorcycle with the deceased, not committing the killing. He has been in custody since 8 October 2024 and has two prior criminal antecedents. The State opposed bail, noting specific allegations against the petitioner and the fact that bail for co‑accused had already been denied. Considering the seriousness of the offences, the evidence, and the petitioner’s antecedents, the Court refused bail. The bail application was therefore dismissed.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in a murder and arms‑act case given the nature and gravity of the offences
Whether the lack of eyewitness testimony and the CCTV footage justify release on bail
Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 61(2)

Subjects

bail
murder
Arms Act
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
criminal antecedents
land dispute
CCTV evidence

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12184 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-621 Year-2024 Thana- ARA NAGAR District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Chhatish Mahto @ Chhatis Mahto @ Chhatis Kumar @ Satish Kumar @
                 Chhatish Kumar S/O Gupteshwar Mahto @ Guput Mahto R/O Village-
                 Ibrahim Nagar, P.S.- Ara Town, District- Bhojpur
                                                                         ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                  ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Diwakar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   10-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                               2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nagar

                   (Ara Town) P.S. Case No. 621 of 2024, instituted for the

                   offences under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                               3. Prosecution case, in short, is that petitioner along

                   with other co-accused persons named in the F.I.R. have

                   murdered the husband of the informant.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

                   petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. There

                   was land dispute between the parties. There is no independent

                   eye-witness of the occurrence. He further submitted that in the

                   CCTV footage, the petitioner along with the deceased and

                   others were seen going on a single motorcycle, but surprisingly

                   no one had seen the petitioner and others killing the deceased.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12184 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
                                                       2/2




                     Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that general and

                     omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner.

                     Charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It has

                     been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is

                     in custody since 08.10.2024 and has two criminal antecedents.

                                 5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

                     opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. There is

                     specific allegation against the petitioner and co-accused Ram

                     Bhavan Mahto. The bail applications of co-accused Anil Kumar

                     and Ram Bhavan Mahto have already been rejected by a co-

                     ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 22.02.2025 passed

                     in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 89200 of 2024 and vide order

                     dated 11.09.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 38268

                     of 2025.

                                  6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

                     of the case, nature and gravity of offence, this Court is not

                     inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.

                                  7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the

                     petitioner is, hereby, rejected.


                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…