Patna High Court
Raj Kishor Mahto @ Chhotu MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The High Court upheld the earlier refusal of bail, rejecting the petitioner's application.
Summary
The petitioner, Raj Kishor Mahto, sought regular bail in a case registered under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act. His earlier bail application had been rejected by the Coordinating Bench of the Patna High Court on 27‑08‑2025. The petitioner argued that there was no fresh material and that the informant had not been examined, but the court noted that the earlier order had already considered all available evidence. The State opposed the bail, and the court, finding no new grounds to revisit the earlier decision, again denied bail, directing that the petitioner may re‑apply after six months if the trial remains pending. The trial court was also instructed to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the earlier rejection and lack of fresh material
- Whether the non‑examination of the informant warrants reconsideration of bail
- Whether the trial should be expedited
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act — s. 103(1), 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bihar Narcotic Substances Act
- trial expeditious
- informant
- pending trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20738 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-467 Year-2024 Thana- BHAGWANPUR HAT District- Siwan
======================================================
Raj Kishor Mahto @ Chhotu Mahto, S/O Raj Deo Mahto, Resident of
Village- Badkagaon, P.S- Bhagwanpur Hat, District- Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Thakur, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection
with Bhagwanpur Hat (Siwan) P.S. Case No. 467 of 2024
instituted for the offence under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5)
of B.N.S. which.
3. Leaned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the bail petition of this petitioner was earlier rejected by the
learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
27.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 42780 of 2025. It has further
been submitted that petitioner is in custody since 06.12.2024
and altogether two witnesses have been examined.
4. On being asked as to whether the informant of this
case has been examined or not, learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20738 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/2
petitioner has submitted that the informant has not been
examined. Order dated 27.08.2025 was passed after considering
all the materials and there is no any fresh material to reconsider
the bail of this petitioner. Vide order dated 27.08.2025, learned
trial Court was directed to expedite the trial of this petitioner.
5. Learned APP appearing for the state has
vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties
and considering the fact that bail petition of the petitioner has
already been rejected earlier by the learned Co-ordinate Bench
of this Court, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner
on bail at this stage and, as such, his prayer for bail stands again
rejected.
7. However, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail
after six months if the trial is not concluded.
8. Learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…