Patna High Court
Ravindra MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The Court enlarged the petitioner on bail.
Summary
Ravindra Mahto was arrested in connection with a case alleging that he and others demanded Rs.5 lakh as rangdari at a sugarcane centre, set fire when denied, and the informant escaped. He was charged under Sections 308(5) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The petitioner claimed innocence, highlighted a four‑day delay in filing the FIR, the absence of any cash taken, injuries, or recovered cartridges, and argued that he had been falsely implicated. The State opposed bail, citing a prior criminal antecedent. After hearing both sides, the Patna High Court granted regular bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, directing the petitioner to appear before the Judicial Magistrate.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted in a case involving alleged extortion (rangdari) and offences under the B.N.S. and Arms Act.
- Whether the four‑day delay in filing the FIR and lack of material evidence justify bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedent warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- regular bail
- B.N.S.
- Arms Act
- rangdari
- FIR delay
- prior criminal antecedent
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24753 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2026 Thana- VISHAMBHARPUR District- Gopalganj
======================================================
Ravindra Mahto, S/o- Chandradeo Mahto, Resident of Village- Kala
Matihania, P.S.- Bisambharpur, Dist- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Adesh Raj Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 16-04-2026 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 308(5) and
3(5) of the B.N.S. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
petitioner along with others arrived at the sugarcane center of
the informant and demanded Rs. 5 lakhs as rangdari and on
being denied, they also made fire but the informant saved
himself anyhow.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has
committed no offence. He has been falsely implicated in this
case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24753 of 2026(2) dt.16-04-2026
2/2
per F.I.R., the date of occurrence is 23.01.2026 whereas the
F.I.R. was lodged on 27.01.2026. There is delay of four days in
filing of the F.I.R. and the delay is not explained. It has further
been submitted that there is only allegation of demanding
rangdari. No cash was handed over and nobody has received
any injury. It has further been submitted that even no empty
cartridges were received from the place of occurrence. Petitioner
is languishing in judicial custody since 29.01.2026.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehemently opposed the application for bail and has submitted
that petitioner is having one criminal antecedent.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned J.M. 1 st
Class, Gopalganj in connection with Bishambharpur P.S. Case
No. 11 of 2026.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.