Patna High Court

Arun Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 29 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PARTHA SARTHY

Holding

Anticipatory bail was granted as the petitioner had no criminal antecedent and the FIR contained only the co‑accused’s statement, making the material against him insufficient to deny bail.

Summary

The petitioner, Arun Kumar Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging examination fraud under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the IPC and section 10 of the Bihar Conduct of Examination Act, 1981. The FIR records a co‑accused’s statement that Mahto appeared in place of another candidate for a fee of Rs.10,000, but there is no direct evidence of Mahto’s participation or any prior criminal record. The petitioner argued that the only material against him is the co‑accused’s statement and he is willing to cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed the bail, but the Court considered the lack of substantive evidence and the petitioner’s clean antecedent. The Court ordered that, if arrested or surrendered within four weeks, the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of equal amount.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail can be granted when the FIR contains only a co‑accused’s statement as material against the petitioner
Whether the petitioner’s lack of criminal antecedent and willingness to cooperate justify granting anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471

Subjects

anticipatory bail
examination fraud
false documents
IPC sections
Bihar Conduct of Examination Act
co‑accused statement
bail bond

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27585 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2024 Thana- KISHANGANJ District- Kishanganj
                 ======================================================
                 Arun Kumar Mahto S/o- Prem Lal Mahto R/v- Kala Patti, Barhi, Madhubani,
                 Kalapatti Po- Kalapatti Dist- Madhubani


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


                                                                             ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rishi Raj, Advocate
                                                  Ms. Meenakshi Priya, Advocate
                                                  Mr. Abhishek Singh Rathaur, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ajay Mishra, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                                  ORAL ORDER

2   29-04-2026                   1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of anticipatory bail apprehending his arrest in connection

                   with Kishanganj P.S. Case no. 40 of 2024 registered under

                   sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal

                   Code and section 10 of the Bihar Conduct of Examination Act,

                   1981.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states

                   that on the co-accused Satish Kumar Sahu coming with his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27585 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
                                            2/3




          appointment letter for joining as a teacher, on verification of the

          documents, it transpired that there was mismatch in his

          signature and photograph. On further enquiry, he confessed that

          he had not appeared in the examination instead on his paying a

          sum of Rs.10,000/-, the petitioner had appeared in his place.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          from the contents of the FIR itself, it would transpire that the

          only material against him is the statement of a co-accused made

          before police. Neither the petitioner was caught appearing in the

          examination nor does he have any concern with the co-accused.

          The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and undertakes to

          cooperate in the investigation/trial.

                       5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by

          learned A.P.P. for the State.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in

          the F.I.R. and the petitioner not having any criminal antecedent,

          it is directed that the petitioner above named, in the event of his

          arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a

          period of four weeks, be released on anticipatory bail in

          connection with Kishanganj P.S. Case no. 40 of 2024 on

          furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27585 of 2026(2) dt.29-04-2026
                                                       3/3




                     two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the

                     learned Sessions Judge, Kishanganj.



                                                 (Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…