Patna High Court
Ram Babu MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted because the petitioner has a clean antecedent and the investigation resulted in a chargesheet in his favour, subject to strict conditions.
Summary
Ram Babu Mahto was arrested in connection with a murder case (Sections 302/34 IPC) arising from PS Rosera Case No 403 of 2021. He applied for bail, asserting that he has a clean antecedent, was falsely implicated, and that the police investigation had produced a chargesheet in his favour. The prosecution opposed the bail, insisting on the seriousness of the offence. The High Court noted the petitioner’s clean record, the favorable chargesheet, and the lower court’s mechanical cognizance, and therefore ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents. The bail order was conditioned on his presence in court and allowed cancellation if conditions are breached.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a murder case under Sections 302 and 34 of the IPC given his clean antecedent and the nature of the chargesheet.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- Section 302
- Section 34
- clean antecedent
- false implication
- Criminal Procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30145 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-403 Year-2021 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur
======================================================
Ram Babu Mahto S/O Umesh Mahto Resident of Village- Khaira Dargah,
P.S.- Rosera, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manish Kumar No 13, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Madhav Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-05-2026 Heard Mr. Manish Kumar No 13, learned counsel for
the petitioner, Mr. Madhav Kumar, learned counsel for the
Informant and Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, learned APP for the
State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
16.01.2026, in connection with Rosera P.S. Case No. 403 of
2021 corresponding to G.R. No. 1275 of 2021 giving rise to
Sessions Trial No. 92 of 2026, F.I.R. dated 16.12.2021
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302/34 of
the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner along with
co-accused person called the husband of the deceased and
thereafter killed him.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30145 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
2/4
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the
petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the police
after investigation submitted chargesheet no. 440 of 2024 dated
30.11.2024 in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner has not
sent up for trial but the learned Court below (A.C.J.M. 1 st,
Rosera, Samastipur) in a mechanical manner has taken
cognizance vide order dated 24.04.2025 under Section 302/34 of
the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner
further submits that on the basis of confession, knife and mobile
of deceased was recovered from the possession of co-accused
person and the petitioner has no role at all in the present
occurrence. He further submits that the police after
investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner and
the petitioner is in custody since 16.01.2026.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30145 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
3/4
and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and the
police after investigation submitted chargesheet in favour of the
petitioner but the learned Court below in a mechanical manner
has taken cognizance in favour of the petitioner, let the
petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail
bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District &
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rosera, Samastipur in connection
with Rosera P.S. Case No. 403 of 2021 corresponding to G.R.
No. 1275 of 2021 giving rise to Sessions Trial No. 92 of 2026,
subject to the following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30145 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026
4/4
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.