Patna High Court
Ramchandra Prasad @ Bola Mukhiya @ Bhola MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail on furnishing a bond and complying with the stipulated conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramchandra Prasad, sought bail in a case registered under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 3(5) of the Bihar Non‑Statutory Act, 2023, alleging fraud in a provisional lease of a pond. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with co‑accused Umesh Mukhiya, fabricated a management committee, prepared a false proposal, and misappropriated Rs.27,440. The petitioner contended that the FIR was false and that a similarly situated co‑accused had already been granted bail. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s participation in the alleged crime and his other pending cases. The Court, noting the earlier bail granted to Umesh Mukhiya and the lack of contrary material, ordered bail for the petitioner on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions for bail. The bail order was directed to be implemented without delay pending verification of the petitioner’s criminal antecedent.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite charges under Sections 316(2), 318(4), 338, 336(3) and 3(5) of the Bihar Non‑Statutory Act, 2023.
- Whether the existence of other pending criminal cases against the petitioner precludes the grant of bail.
- Whether the grant of bail to a co‑accused in a similar circumstance mandates bail for the petitioner.
Subjects
- bail
- fraud
- false FIR
- provisional lease
- pond settlement
- criminal antecedent
- co‑accused
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90286 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-93 Year-2025 Thana- DARPA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Ramchandra Prasad @ Bola Mukhiya @ Bhola Mukhiya S/o Shankar
Mukhiya R/o Village - Gonahi, P.S - Chhauradano, District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prateek Tandon, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mohammed Arif, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 Heard Mr.Prateek Tandon, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr.Mohammed Arif, learned Additional Public
Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
14.10.2025 in connection with Darpa P.S. Case No.93 of 2025,
dated 16.04.2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 316(2),318(4),338,336(3),3(5) of BNS, 2023.
3. The prosecution case in short is that there is
allegation against the petitioner that he alongwith Umesh
Mukhiya illegally held a meeting of a fake management
committee and prepared a fake proposal and petitioner
Ramchandra Prasad by becoming the so-called minister and
Umesh Mukhiya submitted letter no. 12 dated 22.09.2024 to the
Fisheries Directorate, Bihar, Patna for long term pond
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90286 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
settlement. And in the light of that by issuing a provisional lease
of long term settlement of Lohdia pond khata no. 0 khesra 115
area 191 acres of village Lohdia P.S. Darpa in a fraudulent
manner, they are bent upon creating riots at the pond. And Rs.
27,440/- have been defrauded in the name of Government
revenue. Whereas the said power is given to the present
Chairman and Minister. The B.D.O. has also certified that he
has issued certificate in favour of the elected president and
others and the accused persons have committed fraud.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and
fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as
alleged in the FIR. As per allegation in the FIR, the petitioner
and other co-accused persons on the basis of the so called
meeting prepared a fake proposal and become a Minister and
President of the said Committee and on that basis the
Government has settled the pond in favour of fake Committee
and petitioner is so called Minster of the said Committee and
they have altogether misappropriated the amount of Rs. 27,440/-
and co-accused person, namely, Umesh Mukhiya, who is
Chairman of the said Committee, has been granted bail by this
Court vide order dated 13.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.90838
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90286 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
of 2025. The police, after investigation, submitted chargesheet
against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since
14.10.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner has
participated in the present crime in question and he carries six
more cases other than the present one but fairly submits that the
petitioner is on bail in all the cases, as mentioned in para-3 of
the bail petition.
6. Considering the aforesaid fact, similarly situated
co-accused person, namely, Umesh Mukhiya, who is Chairman
of the said Committee, has been granted bail by this Court as
well as period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned J.M.-1st Class, Motihari East Champaran
in connection with Darpa P.S. Case No.93 of 2025,with the
following conditions:-
(I) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90286 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…