Patna High Court

Ramesh MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 3 April 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: HARISH KUMAR

Holding

The bail application was denied because the trial is near completion and the Supreme Court had set aside the earlier bail order.

Summary

Ramesh Mahto applied for bail in a murder and conspiracy case (IPC §§302, 120B read with 34, Arms Act §27) after being ordered to surrender following a Supreme Court decision that set aside a prior bail order. He has been in custody since 10 September 2025 and the trial is nearing completion, with eight of nine prosecution witnesses already examined. The informant, represented by a senior advocate, opposed bail, arguing that the case is at its fag end and the Supreme Court’s earlier ruling precludes a fresh bail grant. The Patna High Court considered the Supreme Court’s order, the advanced stage of the trial, and the pending examination of the ninth witness. Consequently, the court rejected the bail application, directing the trial court to expedite the proceedings.

Issues considered

Whether bail can be granted when the trial is at its fag end and most prosecution witnesses have been examined.
Whether the Supreme Court’s setting aside of the earlier bail order bars a fresh bail application.
Whether the petitioner’s right to liberty outweighs the interest of justice given the pending trial.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27
Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 34

Subjects

bail
trial at fag end
murder
conspiracy
Arms Act
Supreme Court order
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1432 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-369 Year-2024 Thana- MOTIHARI TOWN District- East
                                                       Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Ramesh Mahto Son of Ramrup Mahto Resident of village- Fulwar, P.S.-
                 Banjariya, District- East Champaran

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr.Patanjali Rishi, Adv.
                 For the State           :       Mr.Md. Ataur Rahman, APP
                 For the Informant       :       Mr. N. K. Agrawal, Sr. Adv.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   03-04-2026                   Heard the parties.

                                 2. This is an application for grant of bail to the

                   petitioner, who is in custody in connection with Sessions Trial

                   No. 1019 of 2024, arising out of Motihari Town P.S. Case No.

                   369 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 302, 120B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal

                   Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. Mr. Patanjali Rishi, learned Advocate for the

                   petitioner submitted that earlier the petitioner had moved this

                   Court in Cr. Misc. No. 62213 of 2024 which was allowed vide

                   order dated 20.11.2024. Aggrieved, the informant has preferred

                   SLP (Crl.) No. 3119 of 2025, wherein the Hon’ble Apex Court

                   vide order dated 30.07.2025 has been pleased to set aside the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1432 of 2026(4) dt.03-04-2026
                                            2/3




          order extending bail to the petitioner and directed the petitioner

          to surrender within a period of one week. In pursuance thereof,

          the petitioner surrendered and is facing trial. He further

          contended that now the petitioner has been incarcerating since

          10.09.2025; however till date trial has not been concluded.

                        4. On the other hand, Mr. N. K. Agrawal, learned

          Senior Advocate representing the informant as well as the

          learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the bail

          application and submitted that the trial is at fag end and out of 9

          prosecution witnesses, 8 of them have been examined. So far 9 th

          witness is concerned, the prosecution has filed an application

          seeking leave for non-examination of the 9th witness. It is further

          contended that since on merit the case of the petitioner was duly

          considered by the Apex Court and on being found it is not a fit

          case for regular bail set aside the order of this Court, hence,

          subsequent prayer of the petitioner is unsustainable.

                        5. Having considered the submissions advanced by

          the learned Advocates for the respective parties, and taking note

          of the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as also the fact that

          the trial is at its fag end and is likely to be concluded in the near

          future, this Court is not acceded to the prayer for bail of the

          petitioner.
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1432 of 2026(4) dt.03-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                                  6. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner

                     stands rejected. However, it is expected that the trial court shall

                     expedite the matter.



                                                 (Harish Kumar, J)
Anjani/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…