Patna High Court

Chhabila MandalversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 18 March 2026
Disposal: ALLOWED
Bench: ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to regular bail.

Summary

Petitioner Chhabila Mandal was arrested in connection with a murder case (Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 146 of 2025) alleged under several sections of the Bihar Non‑Comp Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution’s case described an assault on the informant’s husband by an armed assailant, leading to his death, but the petitioner’s name does not appear in the FIR; it only surfaced in the informant’s re‑statement with no specific allegation. The petitioner argued innocence, lack of prior criminal record, and pointed to the bail granted to a co‑accused, Sumit Kumar, in a similar circumstance. The State opposed regular bail. Considering the absence of a direct charge, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the precedent of bail to the co‑accused, the court ordered his release on regular bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite not being named in the FIR and having no specific allegation against him

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 27

Subjects

regular bail
criminal procedure
murder
arms act
Bihar
bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17681 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2025 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 Chhabila Mandal Son of Mahendra Mandal Resident of Village- Rohua, P.S.-
                 Sonbarsa, District -Sitamarhi.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s      :      Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Shubh Raj, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Karu Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-03-2026                        Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                 2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under sections 190, 191

                   (2), 191 (3), 115 (2), 118 (1), 303 (2), 103 (1) of the BNS and

                   Section 27 of the Arms Act.

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

                   husband of the deceased had gone with Amit Kumar and

                   Abhishek Baitha towards Sitamarhi. As the informant suspected

                   that some untoward incident might take place, she along with

                   her brother-in-law also proceeded on a bike towards Rohua and

                   upon they reached near village-Rohua, she found that nine
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17681 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
                                            2/3




          persons are present there. It is alleged that Chandan Mahto was

          armed with ‘dabia’ and assaulted the husband of the informant

          with the same, as a result of which he succumbed to the injuries.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in

          connection with the present case. It is further submitted that the

          petitioner is not named in the FIR whereas 9 persons were

          named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner has surfaced on the re-

          statement of the informant. There is no specific allegation

          against this petitioner. It is further submitted that co-accused

          namely, Sumit Kumar has already been granted bail by a Bench

          of this Court vide order dated 31.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc.

          No. 1640 of 2026. The case of the petitioner stands on similar

          footing. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial

          custody since 18.08.2025 having no criminal antecedent.

                       5.     Learned APP appearing for the State has

          vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on

          bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on

          bail in connection with Sonbarsa P.S. Case No. 146 of 2025 on

          furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17681 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                      sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned

                      Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi.



                                            (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Jagdish/-

U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…