Patna High Court
Ram Babu MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that continued detention would be punitive pre‑trial incarceration and contrary to Article 21, and thus granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Ram Babu Mahto was arrested in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 583 of 2022 for offences under Sections 272, 273, 328, 308, 304 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30(a), 33 and 34 of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. He has been in judicial custody since 14 June 2025 and this was his second bail application after a prior denial. The petitioner argued that continued pre‑trial detention violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the charges. The Court held that prolonged detention would amount to punitive pre‑trial incarceration and was contrary to the spirit of Article 21, and therefore granted bail subject to monetary and personal conditions. The bail order required a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, non‑commission of similar offences, and restriction on leaving the jurisdiction.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the gravity of the offences and prior denial of bail
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention infringes the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21
- Whether the conditions imposed for bail are appropriate and sufficient
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 33, 34
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 272, 273, 304, 308, 328
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Indian Penal Code
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- criminal procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20983 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-583 Year-2022 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran
======================================================
Ram Babu Mahto S/O Late Hira Mahto @ Hiralal Mahto R/O Village- Doila,
P.S- Isuapur, District - Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rabindra Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr. Ajeet Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Mashrakh P.S. Case No. 583 of 2022, instituted for the offences
under Sections 272, 273, 328, 308, 304 and 120(B) of the Indian
Penal Code, read with Sections 30(a), 33 and 34 of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
03.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 47717 of 2025 taking into
consideration the nature and gravity of the offence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 14.06.2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20983 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
without any rhymes or reason and has got four criminal
antecedents. It is submitted that charge-sheet has been submitted
in this case as also cognizance has been taken and charge has
been framed against the petitioner. It is next submits that out of
thirty-nine witnesses, only one witness has been examined in
this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
the continued incarceration of the petitioner without conclusion
of trial amounts to a gross violation of the fundamental right
guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which
reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of Judgments.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, charge has been framed against the petitioner, the
period of custody undergone by the petitioner and taking into
account the fact that continued detention of the petitioner would
serve no purpose other than punitive pretrial incarceration,
which is antithetical to the spirit of Article 21 of the
Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20983 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Mashrakh P.S. Case
No. 583 of 2022, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial and shall not remain absent on two consecutive
dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner will not tamper with the evidence
or the witnesses during the trial.
(IV) Petitioner shall not commit offence of similar
nature in future.
(V) The petitioner shall not leave the territorial
jurisdiction of the learned Court below without taking prior
permission of the Court concerned.
If any of the above conditions are violated, the Trial
Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.