Mannu Kumar Mehta @ Mannu MehtaversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.62051 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-65 Year-2023 Thana- BHAPTIAHI District- Supaul
                 ======================================================
                 Mannu Kumar Mehta @ Mannu Mehta S/O Krishna Kumar Mehta @ Ramu
                 Mehta Resident of Village- Tengarha Ward No. 2, P.S.- Bhaptiyahi, District-
                 Supaul.

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Kamal Kishore Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Nand Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   11-03-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   prayer for bail of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order

                   dated 19.03.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 85331

                   of 2024. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody

                   since 12.01.2024. Learned counsel further submits that in the

                   present case the petitioner was directed to file a supplementary

                   affidavit bringing on record substantial proof to show that the

                   petitioner is not absconding in any of the cases mentioned in

                   paragraph no. 3 of the petition.

                                3. It is further submitted that, in fact, there were eight

                   criminal cases in which the petitioner’s name appeared. Out of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62051 of 2025(5) dt.11-03-2026
                                            2/3




          the said eight criminal cases, the petitioner has already been

          acquitted in three cases and, therefore, disclosure was made by

          the pairvikar in paragraph no. 3 of the main petition that only

          five criminal cases are pending against the petitioner. However,

          in the supplementary affidavit, detailed disclosure has been

          made and it has been categorically stated in different paragraphs

          that the petitioner is not absconding in any of the criminal cases

          pending against him.

                       4. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer

          for bail and submits that on the earlier occasion a report with

          regard to the present stage of the trial was called for. He further

          submits that he has verified the statements made in paragraph

          no. 3 of the petition as well as in the supplementary affidavit,

          and it has correctly been mentioned by the learned counsel for

          the petitioner that disclosure has been made with regard to five

          pending cases, whereas in three criminal cases the petitioner has

          already been acquitted. The details of those three cases are

          different from the cases which are presently pending.

                       5. From the perusal of the report received from the

          Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Supaul, it appears that charge has

          already been framed, and out of six prosecution witnesses, three

          witnesses have been examined and cross-examined.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.62051 of 2025(5) dt.11-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                                   6. In the present facts and circumstances, let the

                      petitioner above named, be granted bail on furnishing bail bonds

                      of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) as mentioned in

                      Section 2(1) (d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of learned

                      Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Supaul in connection with S.T.

                      Case No. 333 of 2024 arising out of Bhaptiyahi P.S. Case No. 65

                      of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section

                      480(3) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

                                   (i) one of the bailor should be the family member of

                      the petitioner who shall provide official document to show

                      his/her bona fide;

                                   (ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date

                      before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive

                      dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of their

                      bail bonds by the Trial Court itself;

                                   (iii) If the petitioner found involved in similar cases in

                      future, their bail bonds shall be liable to be cancelled.



                                                  (Dr. Anshuman, J)
Ashwini/-

U      T