Patna High Court

Nagendra MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 27 February 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner with specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Nagendra Mahto, applied for bail in a case registered as Sarai Ranjan P.S. Case No. 113 of 2024 under Section 309(4) of the B.N.S., 2023, alleging that he was falsely implicated in a robbery of a bolero pickup. The prosecution alleged that two unknown miscreants committed the robbery, but a confessional statement by an apprehended suspect named the petitioner, though no material evidence was recovered from him. The petitioner contended his innocence, highlighted the lack of recovered items, and pointed out his prolonged judicial custody since November 2024. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner's alleged criminal antecedent of twenty‑one cases. After hearing both sides, the court granted bail on the condition of cooperation with the trial, regular attendance before the trial court, weekly reporting to the police station, and furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 309(4) of the B.N.S., 2023 despite the prosecution's claim of a criminal antecedent.

Legislation cited

B.N.S., 2023 — s. 309(4)

Subjects

bail
Section 309(4) B.N.S.
criminal antecedent
confessional statement
judicial custody

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12547 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2024 Thana- SARAI RANJAN District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Nagendra Mahto Son of Ram Kishun Mahto R/O Village- Daulatpur Chandi,
                 P.S- Hajipur Sadar, District- Vaishali

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Dhirendra Prasad Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   27-02-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Sarai Ranjan P.S. Case No. 113 of 2024 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Section 309(4) of the B.N.S., 2023.

                                3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that two

                   unknown miscreants have snatched the bolero pickup of the

                   informant on gunpoint.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner

                   has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no

                   offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. He also

                   submits that the FIR was lodged against unknown miscreants.

                   During the course of the investigation, one Arvind Sahni was

                   apprehended and he has given his confessional statement in which
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12547 of 2026(2) dt.27-02-2026
                                                       2/2




                     the name of this petitioner has surfaced. He also submits that

                     nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

                     Save and except the confessional statement, there is nothing

                     against the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is

                     languishing in judicial custody since 16.11.2024.

                                  5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP

                     for the State and submits that the petitioner is having criminal

                     antecedent of twenty one cases.

                                  6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the condition that

                     the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and shall remain

                     present on each and every date fixed by the learned trial court

                     and shall mark his weekly attendance at Vaishali P.S. The

                     above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on

                     furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with

                     two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

                     learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur in connection with

                     Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 113 of 2024.



                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…