Patna High Court
Sunil MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.
Summary
Sunil Mandal was arrested in connection with a case registered on 10 October 2021 alleging murder, attempt to murder, criminal conspiracy under Sections 302, 307, 120(B) of the IPC and an offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleges that Mandal, along with others, fired at the wife of an informant, causing her death, and that the motive was to pressure the informant into registering land in their favour. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that the FIR does not specifically allege his participation, and that the post‑mortem report does not conclusively link him to the shooting; he also highlighted his clean antecedent and the fact that the trial was still pending with three witnesses yet to be examined. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the firearm‑related death and the limited number of remaining witnesses. The Court, noting that the petitioner had previously been allowed to renew his bail application after six months and that the trial was far from conclusion, granted bail on the condition of a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and several strict conditions including non‑contact with the informant’s family and personal appearance at every trial date. The order also stipulated that any violation of the conditions could lead to cancellation of bail. The application was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving murder, attempt to murder, criminal conspiracy and an offence under the Arms Act pending trial.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 307
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- attempt to murder
- criminal conspiracy
- Arms Act
- Indian Penal Code
- high court
- trial pending
- conditions of bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81772 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-329 Year-2021 Thana- BARHARA KOTHI District- Purnia
======================================================
Sunil Mandal S/o Late Ramdeo Mandal @ Ramdev Mandal Resident of
Belapemu, Dargah Tola, P.S.- Barhara (Raghuvansh Nagar O.P.), District-
Purnea
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar BIHAR
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Raj Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P for the State.
2. This is the fourth bail application of the petitioner.
Earlier, the regular bail application of the petitioner was rejected
thrice vide order dated 06.09.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
68267/2022, vide order dated 26.04.2024 passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 21734/2024 and vide order dated 10.07.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 85853/2024.
3. Th petitioner seeks bail in connection with S. Tr.
No. 142/2024 arising out of Barhara (Raghuvansh Nagar O.P.)
P.S. Case No. 329 of 2021 dated 10.10.2021 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, 120(B) of the
I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81772 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
2/4
4. As per the prosecution case, it is alleged that the
petitioner along with others had fired upon the head of the wife
of the informant who succumbed to such injuries. It is further
alleged that the accused persons have earlier fired upon her
twice and they were creating pressure for registering the land in
their favour without making any payment for the same.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated and the allegation of
shooting has been attributed upon three persons including the
petitioner. However, there is no specific allegation of assault by
the petitioner. It has further been submitted that the allegation
levelled in the F.I.R. is not supported by the post-mortem report.
It has further been submitted that the report which was called
for states that the informant and two others witnesses are still to
be examined and therefore, there is no reasonable possibility of
the trial concluding in the near future. It has lastly been
submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in
custody since 05.07.2022.
6. Learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner and submitted that there is allegation
upon the petitioner to have fired upon the informant’s wife
resulting in her death. It has further been submitted that even the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81772 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
3/4
post-mortem report suggest that wife of the informant died due
to firearms injury. It has further been submitted that since only
three witnesses remains to be examined, the petitioner should
not be released on bail.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and taking into account that the petitioner had earlier been
given liberty to renew his prayer of bail after six months vide
order dated 26.04.2024 despite the passage of time and rejection
of his earlier bail application the trial is still to be concluded and
three witnesses remains to be examined, the petitioner is
directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the
sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below
where the case is pending/successor court in connection with S.
Tr. No. 142/2024 arising out of Barhara (Raghuvansh Nagar
O.P.) P.S. Case No. 329 of 2021, subject to the following terms
and conditions :-
(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the
petitioner and others would be a government servant.
(ii) The petitioner shall refrain from contacting the
informant or any member of the informant’s family during the
pendency of the trial.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81772 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
4/4
(iii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the trial
and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iv) In case of absence on two consecutive dates or in
violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner
will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(v) The trial court shall verify the criminal antecedent
of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is found that the
petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the trial court
shall take necessary steps for cancellation of bail bond of the
petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in terms of the
above mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in
the name of verification.
8. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
9. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Gautam/-
U T
Checking your session…