Patna High Court
Ram Pukar MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court held that the allegations amounted only to a last‑seen case and, in the absence of substantive material linking the accused to the alleged kidnapping, anticipatory bail must be granted.
Summary
The petitioners, four residents of Madhubani district, applied for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No.173 of 2025 alleging offences under sections 140(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The informant claimed the petitioners kidnapped her husband after he accompanied them to a relative’s house for a compromise discussion, and the husband subsequently disappeared. The petitioners contended they were falsely implicated due to prior enmity and that the case was merely a "last seen" matter with no investigative material linking them to the alleged crime. The State opposed bail, relying on the FIR’s direct allegations. After hearing both sides, the Court noted the lack of substantive evidence and the nature of the allegation as a last‑seen case, and ordered that the petitioners be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties each. The order is subject to surrender before the Judicial Magistrate within four weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under sections 140(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 in view of the kidnapping allegation.
- Whether the FIR and the material gathered in investigation constitute sufficient grounds to deny anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 140(3), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- kidnapping
- FIR
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- last seen case
- enquiry
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3895 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-173 Year-2025 Thana- BASOPATTI District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. Ram Pukar Mandal Son of Late Sukhdeo Mandal @ Sukha Mandal
2. Ram Prasad Mandal Son of Late Sukhdeo Mandal @ Sukha Mandal
3. Gauri Mandal @ Gauri Shankar Mandal Son of Khedan Mandal @ Khaden
Mandal
4. Khedan Mandal @ Khaden Mandal Son of Late Vathu Mandal
All Resident of Village - Barkurba Selibeli, Ward No 12, PS - Basopatti,
Dist. - Madhubani.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bhavesh Kumar Sah, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Kripa Nand Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
4 22-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioners in this application pray for bail
apprehending their arrest in connection with Basopatti P.S. Case
no.173 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under
sections 140(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that on 19.7.2025 at about 7-8 a.m., the accused persons
including the petitioners asked the husband of the informant to
accompany them to Gobrahi their mama’s place to enter into a
compromise in a pending case. It is stated that the informant’s
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3895 of 2026(4) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
husband went with the petitioners and others but thereafter he
has disappeared. Inspite of search, he has not been found. The
informant states that she suspects that some unfortunate
occurrence may have taken place.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the case. The
story of the informant going with the petitioners to their mama’s
place for talk of compromise are all false and concocted. The
cause of false implication of the petitioners is prior enmity
which would be evident from the FIR itself. At best, the case
against the petitioners is of last seen and no material has
transpired in course of investigation to connect the petitioners
with the alleged crime.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.
Learned counsel for the informant submits that the petitioners
are named in the FIR and there is direct allegation against them
of having kidnapped the informant’s husband after he went with
them for talk of compromise with respect to a pending case. So
far as the delay is concerned, it is explained from the contents of
the FIR itself as the informant was making enquiries with
respect to his whereabouts.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3895 of 2026(4) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the material
that has transpired in course of investigation and at best the case
against the petitioners being one of last seen, it is directed that
all the 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
Basopatti P.S. Case no.173 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 the satisfaction of the learned
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Madhubani.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Saurabh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.