Patna High Court
Harichandra Mahto @ Harichandra Mahato @ Harischandra MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted in view of the grave nature of the charges and the evidence presented.
Summary
Harichandra Mahto was charged with offences including murder (IPC s.302) and several other IPC offences arising from a violent assault that resulted in the victim's death. He has been in custody since March 2022 and earlier bail applications were denied. He renewed his prayer for regular bail, arguing that the trial has not concluded and he has been detained for over three and a half years. The prosecution opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the assault and the victim's death. After hearing both sides and noting that most prosecution witnesses have been examined, the Court declined to grant bail and ordered the trial court to complete the trial within four months.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences, including murder, and the prolonged period of pre‑trial detention.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 307, 323, 324, 34, 341, 379, 504
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- murder
- assault
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81159 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2021 Thana- BHAGWANPUR HAT District- Siwan
======================================================
Harichandra Mahto @ Harichandra Mahato @ Harischandra Mahto Son of
Tapeshwar Mahto Resident of Village - Naduan, P.S. - Bhagwanpur Hat,
District - Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar, Advocate
Mr.Niraj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Rajendra Nath Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
4 16-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of
regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial no.30 of 2022,
arising out of Bhagwanpur Hat P.S. Case no. 190 of 2021
registered under sections 307, 341, 323, 324, 379, 504 and 34 of
the Indian Penal Code to which section 302 of the Indian Penal
Code was added subsequently
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner
surrounded the son of the informant and on his call the other
accused persons reached there. They started to assault with lathi,
bhala, sword etc. The petitioner is said to have assaulted with
farsa on the head of the victim leading to serious head injuries
and the victim subsequently dying.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81159 of 2025(4) dt.16-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that t he
earlier application for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order
dated 4.10.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. no.58860 of 2024. Inspite of
the petitioner having remained in custody since 8.3.2022, the trial
has still not concluded nor is there chance of the same concluding
in the near future. The petitioner having remained in custody for
more than 3½ years, he be enlarged on bail on any conditions
which may be laid by this Court.
5. The prayer for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P for
the State. It is submitted that as a result of assault by the
petitioner with a farsa on the head of the victim lead to serious
injuries and the victim subsequently dying.
6. A report was called for from the learned trial Court.
As per the report received contained in letter dated 11.12.2025
of the District & Additional Sessions Judge-III-cum- Special
Judge MPs/ MLAs/ MLCs Court, Siwan out of the total seven
chargesheet witnesses, six witnesses had been examined and one
witness and a doctor remained to be examined. Further as per
report contained in letter dated 18.12.2025 received from the
Superintendent of Police, Siwan, a total of 8 witnesses including
the Police Officer and doctor have been examined.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81159 of 2025(4) dt.16-01-2026
3/3
the F.I.R and 8 witnesses on behalf of the prosecution having
been examined, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
8. The learned trial Court is directed to conclude the
trial at the earliest preferably within a period of 4 months from
the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Shiv/-
U T
Checking your session…