Patna High Court

Mintu PaswanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 18 March 2026
Disposal: REJECTED
Bench: RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

Holding

The bail petition is dismissed; the petitioner is not entitled to bail.

Summary

Mintu Paswan, arrested on 9 February 2024, is charged under IPC Sections 364, 120B, 302 and 201 in connection with a 2020 case involving the alleged killing of an informant's son. He applied for bail, asserting a clean antecedent and claiming the FIR is fabricated. The State opposed, contending that the petitioner participated in the murder alongside co‑accused Niraj Paswan. The trial court had already closed both prosecution and defence evidence, with the case slated for defence arguments. Considering the seriousness of the offences and the advanced stage of trial, the Patna High Court refused the bail petition and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner charged with dacoity, criminal conspiracy, murder and abetment of disappearance of evidence at the current stage of trial

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 201, 302, 364

Subjects

bail
IPC
Section 364
Section 120B
Section 302
Section 201
serious offences
trial stage
high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74833 of 2025
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2020 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Mintu Paswan S/o Saryug Paswan R/o Village- Nathudar, P.S.- Khanpur,
                 District- Samastipur

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

                                                         .. ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Madhav Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   18-03-2026                  Heard Mr. Madhav Kumar, learned counsel for the

                   petitioner and Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned A.P.P. for the

                   State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since

                   09.02.2024 in connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 216 of

                   2020, F.I.R. dated 15.11.2020 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 364, 120B. Later on section 302

                   and 201 of the Indian Penal Code was added.

                                3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was

                   rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.12.2024 passed in

                   Cr. Misc. No. 50366 of 2024.

                                4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

                   submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has

                   falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits

                   that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74833 of 2025(5) dt.18-03-2026
                                            2/3




          and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in

          the FIR.

                       5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on

          the basis of material available on record and the case diary

          vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and

          submits that it has come during investigation that the

          petitioner has committed present crime in question and as per

          allegation in the FIR, the petitioner was also accompanied

          with the co-accused, namely, Niraj Paswan and killed the son

          of the informant.

                       6. Vide order dated 30.01.2026, a report was called

          for with regard to the stage of the trial. Report of the learned

          Trial Court dated 26.02.2026 reveals that the prosecution

          evidence and the defence evidence have already been closed

          and now the case is fixed for argument of defence.

                       7. Considering the nature of allegation against the

          petitioner as alleged in the FIR as well as the report of the

          learned Trial Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner

          on bail in connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 216 of

          2020, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions

          Judge-II, Samastipur.

                       8. Prayer is refused.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74833 of 2025(5) dt.18-03-2026
                                                        3/3




                                   9. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to

                      expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.


                                                     (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

Ranjeet/-
U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…