Patna High Court
Mahesh ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that the time for furnishing the bail bond may be further extended, subject to payment of a cost, to prevent undue hardship to the petitioner.
Summary
Mahesh Chaudhary, a chef residing in Leh Ladakh, had been granted anticipatory bail on 24‑09‑2025 with a direction to furnish a bail bond within four weeks. He was unable to comply due to heavy snowfall that impeded travel. He filed an application seeking a further extension of time to furnish the bond. The State opposed, noting that the original deadline had already been set. The Court, after hearing both sides, extended the period by another four weeks, conditioning the extension on the payment of a Rs.2000 cost to the High Court Legal Services Committee. The order dated 24‑09‑2025 was thereby modified accordingly.
Issues considered
- Whether the time prescribed for furnishing a bail bond under anticipatory bail can be further extended on account of hardship
- Whether the Court may impose a cost for granting such an extension
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail bond
- modification of order
- extension of time
- cost imposition
- CrPC Section 438
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90821 of 2025
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64251 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2025 Thana- BARACHATTI District- Gaya
======================================================
Mahesh Chaudhary S/O Kali Chaudhary R/O Vill.- Kurmawan, P.S.-
Barachatti, Dist.- Gaya ji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bharat Lal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 16-01-2026 Learned Advocate for the respective parties are
present.
2. The present application has been filed seeking
modification of the order dated 24.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc.
No.64251 of 2025, whereby while extending the privilege of
anticipatory bail, the petitioner was directed to furnish bail
bond, preferably within a period of four weeks.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
since the petitioner had been residing in Leh Ladakh where he
works as a Chef in Hotels and there was a heavy snowfall, he
could not come and furnish bail bond within the period
prescribed.
4. Learned Advocate for the State opposed the prayer
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90821 of 2025(2) dt.16-01-2026
2/2
and submitted that the petitioner was extended the privilege of
anticipatory bail on 24.09.2025 itself.
5. Considering the submissions advanced by the
learned Advocate for the respective parties, further four weeks
time is extended for furnishing bail bond, subject to the payment
of a cost of Rs.2000/- to be deposited with the Patna High Court
Legal Services Committee.
6. The order dated 24.09.2025 stands modified to the
extent indicated above.
(Harish Kumar, J)
rohit/-
U T
Checking your session…