Patna High Court
Chandan Mahto @ Chandan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied as the petitioner was already subject to a process of law.
Summary
The petitioner, Chandan Mahto, feared arrest in connection with a case (PS Sonbarsha Case No.146 of 2025) involving alleged offences under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3), 115(2), 118(1), 303(2) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The FIR arose after the informant, Kavita Kumari, reported that her husband was assaulted and later died from injuries. The prosecution indicated that a process had already been issued against the petitioner, as shown in paragraph no. 72 dated 10‑12‑2025. The petitioner applied for anticipatory bail to avoid arrest. The Court, after hearing, held that the anticipatory bail application could not be entertained and rejected it, directing that the petitioner remain liable to arrest.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner in view of the pending criminal proceedings and the existence of a process issued against him
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103(1), 115(2), 118(1), 190, 191(2), 191(3), 303(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- sections 190,191,115,118,303,103
- FIR
- arrest
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7885 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-146 Year-2025 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Chandan Mahto @ Chandan Kumar S/o Nageshwar Mahto R/o Village-
Bhutha, P.S.- Sonbarsha, District- Sitamarhi
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhuresh Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
3 01-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Sonbarsha P.S. Case No. 146 of 2025 registered
for the offence punishable under Sections 190, 191(2), 191(3),
115(2), 118(1), 303(2) and 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, lodged on 21.04.2025 by the informant Kavita Kumari.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that the accused persons came to her place, took her husband
outside on the pretext of some work. Later, she came to know
that he is being assaulted, rushed to the place and found him
with multiple injuries, the accused in the meantime managed to
escape. He was shifted to the Sadar Hospital for treatment but
was declared dead. This led to the F.I.R..
4. In this case, the coordinate Bench had called for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7885 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026
2/2
case diary and learned APP straight away took this Court to
paragraph no. 72 which is dated 10.12.2025 to show process
have already been issued against this petitioner.
5. In that background, it would be appropriate that the
petitioner seek bail, the anticipatory bail application stands
rejected.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…