Patna High Court

Munna Kumar @ Munna Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 11 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Munna Kumar Mahto was arrested in connection with a FIR alleging offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. He had previously been denied anticipatory bail by a coordinate bench of the Patna High Court. The petitioner claimed he was falsely implicated, that no notice was issued before the FIR, and that no forged documents were recovered from him. He had been in custody since 22 August 2025 and asserted he had no prior criminal record. The court, after considering the nature of the accusations, the period of custody and the petitioner’s submissions, decided to grant bail on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties of the same amount.

Issues considered

Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120(B) of the IPC
Whether the petitioner’s claim of false implication and lack of forged documents warrants bail

Legislation cited

Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 420, 467, 468, 471

Subjects

bail
anticipatory bail
IPC
Section 420
Section 467
Section 468
Section 471
Section 120B
false implication
forged documents
criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.80547 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2024 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Munna Kumar @ Munna Kumar Mahto S/O Ramjanam Mahto Resident of
                 Village- Parshurampur, P.S.- Pipra, District- East Champaran (Bihar)



                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus


           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Dy. S.P. Vigilance Department, Bihar, Patna Patna



                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s            :       Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
                                                         Mr. Mohan Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
                                                         Mr. Ujjwal Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State                   :       Mr. Ajay Mishra, APP
                 For the Opposite Party No.2     :       Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   11-02-2026              Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State. Perused the case diary.

                            2.      The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 324 of 2024 instituted for the offence

                   under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120(B) of the Indian Penal

                   Code. Earlier vide order dated 14.05.2025, passed in Cr. Misc.

                   No. 29098 of 2025, anticipatory bail of the petitioner was

                   rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

                            3.      As per prosecution case, on the basis of forged
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80547 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
                                            2/3




          eligibility certificate, the petitioner got appointed as Block

          Teacher in the Middle School, Block – Kalyanpur in the year

          2011.

                  4.      It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner

          that the petitioner is in custody since 22.08.2025. Petitioner

          bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in

          paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

                  5.      It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s

          counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present

          case. Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly submits that no

          notice has been given prior to lodging of this FIR and he has

          already been terminated on the basis of such allegation. It is

          submitted that no forged document is recovered from the

          possession of the petitioner.

                  6.      Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                  7.      Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

          of the case, period of custody of the petitioner and nature of

          accusation, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

                  8.      Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties

          of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.80547 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     below/concerned Court in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case

                     No. 324 of 2024.



                                                                 (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…