Patna High Court
Pankaj Mahto @ Pankaj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that anticipatory bail could not be granted to the petitioner as the earlier rejection and lack of direct accusation negate any claim of parity.
Summary
Pankaj Mahto applied for anticipatory bail in connection with a case involving offences under Sections 103, 61(2) and 3(5) of the BNS. His earlier anticipatory bail application (Cr. Misc. No.42010 of 2025) was rejected, while later applications by co‑accused Om Kumar and Ranjit Rai were granted. The petitioner argued that parity should compel the court to grant him bail, contending that he is not named in the FIR and that the allegations pertain to Bhullu Rai. The State argued that the earlier rejection, the lack of any direct accusation against the petitioner, and his alleged evasion of police negate any claim to parity. The court held that the earlier rejection and the absence of a direct charge against the petitioner preclude the grant of anticipatory bail, and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail on the ground of parity with co‑accused who were later granted bail.
- Whether the fact that the petitioner is not named in the FIR but is alleged by a co‑accused affects his right to anticipatory bail.
- Whether a prior rejection of anticipatory bail bars a subsequent application.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 103, 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- parity
- bail jurisprudence
- criminal procedure
- FIR
- investigation
- bail rejection
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21893 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-315 Year-2024 Thana- RAGHOPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Pankaj Mahto @ Pankaj Kumar Son of Kailash Mahto Resident of Village -
Rustampur Pachhariya, P.S.- Rustampur, District - Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Rekha Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Lalan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Raghopur P.S. Case No.315 of 2024, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 103, 61(2) and 3(5) of BNS.
3. Learned APP at the outset submits that petitioner
had earlier moved this court seeking anticipatory bail by filing
Cr. Misc. No.42010 of 2025 and the same came to be rejected
by an order dated 09.07.2025. It is further submitted that
thereafter Om Kumar @ Om Rai had approached this court
seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.57935 of 2025
and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 27.08.2025
passed by a learned coordinate Bench, thereafter Ranjit Rai
approached this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr.
Misc. No.73263 of 2025 and the same came to be allowed by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21893 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
2/4
this court by an order dated 11.02.2026 but then it is submitted
that what is remarkable is that from perusal of the order dated
27.08.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.57935 of 2025 and order dated
11.02.2026 in Cr. Misc. No.73263 of 2025, the order dated
09.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.42010 of 2025 was not brought to
the notice of the Court. Learned APP fairly submits that no
doubt parity is to be maintained but when petitioner earlier
moved before this court and his anticipatory bail came to be
rejected and concealing the said fact, subsequent anticipatory
bail was obtained by other accused persons, whether the same
entitles the petitioner to seek anticipatory bail based on parity. It
is submitted that the answer is obvious no.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that informant alleges that her husband was in judicial
custody and his friend Bhullu Rai used to visit her and
pressurized her for getting married to him, further on 08.11.2024
in her absence, Bhullu Rai kidnapped her minor son aged about
three years and threatened that if she will not marry him, the
child would be killed and thereafter called her at Jethuli Ghat
where the informant went, but the child was not handed over,
further on 09.11.2024, the dead body of the child was recovered,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21893 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
3/4
thus, alleges that Bhullu in conspiracy killed the child.
5. It is thus submitted that specific allegation in the
FIR of killing the child is against Bhullu Rai and petitioner is
not named in the FIR, on which, the learned APP submits that
when Bhullu Rai was apprehended, he disclosed the name of the
petitioner. It is also submitted that a child of 3 years was killed
whose dead body was recovered, whether petitioner was
involved in the occurrence or not is an aspect of investigation
and if petitioner is not involved in the occurrence then why he is
evading the police and has filed the second anticipatory bail
application merely for the reason that some other similarly
situated co-accused have been granted the privilege of
anticipatory bail by concealing the earlier order dated
09.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.42010 of 2025. It is also submitted
that anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was rejected
on 09.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.42010 of 2025 and nearly eight
months thereafter, the instant second anticipatory bail
application has been filed, which amply demonstrates that the
petitioner is evading the law.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties,
the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21893 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
4/4
7. Accordingly, the instant anticipatory bail
application of the petitioner stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.