Patna High Court
Anil Mehta @ Anil Kumar MehtaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The High Court granted anticipatory bail to all three petitioners, subject to a bail bond and sureties.
Summary
The petitioners, Anil Mehta, Chhedni Devi and Sadhu Mehta, applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a criminal case (Birpur P.S. Case No. 258 of 2025) registered under sections 137(2), 140(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleges that the informant's 65‑year‑old mother was kidnapped and killed by co‑accused, and suggests a conspiracy involving the petitioners, who are also parties to pending land title suits with the informant. The petitioners contend that the FIR implicates only the co‑accused, that there is no eyewitness or material linking them to the crime, and that they have no criminal antecedent. The learned Sessions Judge had earlier rejected bail, but the High Court, after hearing counsel, noted the lack of substantive evidence and the pending civil disputes, and ordered that the petitioners be released on anticipatory bail if arrested or surrendered within four weeks, subject to a bail bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties of equal amount. The order was pronounced by Justice Partha Sarthy.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriateness of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioners under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, given the allegations of kidnapping and the absence of direct evidence linking them to the offence?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 140(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping
- false implication
- land dispute
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- bail bond
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3693 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-258 Year-2025 Thana- BIRPUR District- Supaul
======================================================
1. Anil Mehta @ Anil Kumar Mehta S/o- Sadhu Mehta @ Sadanand Mehta
R/v- Basmatiya Ps- Basmatiya Dist- Araria
2. Chhedni Devi @ Lalita Devi W/o- Sadhu Mehta @ Sadanand Mehta R/v-
Basmatiya Ps- Basmatiya Dist- Araria
3. Sadhu Mehta @ Sadanand Mehta S/o- Panchi Mehta @ Panji Mehta @
Panchlal Mehta R/v- Basmatiya Ps- Basmatiya Dist- Araria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Naresh Kumar Mehta, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners have preferred this application for
grant of anticipatory bail apprehending their arrest in connection
with Birpur P.S. Case no. 258 of 2025 registered under sections
137(2), 140(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that on the date of occurrence, Ramakant Mehta, Raj Kumar
Mehta and Kishun Mehta, as a result of conspiracy, forcibly
took away his 65 year old mother on a motorcycle. She was not
to be found. The informant further states that he has land dispute
with the five named accused persons including the three
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3693 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
petitioners herein. Further reference of Title Suit T.S. no. 266 of
2024 and T.S. no. 214 of 2023 has been given. The informant
states that his mother has been kidnapped and killed and the
dead-body made to disappear.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
cause of false implication of the petitioners is evident from the
contents of the FIR itself wherein pendency of the title suits has
been given. It is submitted that the allegation of kidnapping of
the mother of the informant is on the co-accused and not the
petitioners herein. Referring to the order of the learned trial
Court, it is submitted that the material which has transpired in
course of investigation has been dealt with in detail by the
learned Court below. Neither there is any eyewitness to the
occurrence nor any material has transpired in course of
investigation to connect the petitioners with the alleged crime. It
is for this reason that the learned Sessions Judge observes in the
order rejecting the bail of the petitioners that all the
‘presumption’ goes against the accused persons. The petitioners
have no criminal antecedent and undertake to cooperate in the
investigation.
5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by
learned A.P.P. for the State.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3693 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the contents of the FIR, the allegation
against the petitioners herein, pendency of title suits between the
parties and the material that has transpired in course of
investigation as has been dealt with in detail by the learned
Sessions Judge in the order rejecting the application for bail of
the petitioners together with the petitioners not having any
criminal antecedent, it is directed that all the three petitioners
above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the
learned Court below within a period of four weeks, be released
on anticipatory bail in connection with Birpur P.S. Case no. 258
of 2025 on each of them furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial
Magistrate-I, Birpur, Supaul.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
U T
Checking your session…