Patna High Court
Devendra Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to stringent conditions.
Summary
Devendra Kumar Mahto, who is in custody, applied for bail in a case registered under Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, along with provisions of the Arms Act, 1959 and the NDPS Act, 1985. The prosecution alleges that he was seized with 41.61 grams of smack and 19 live cartridges, while the pistol was recovered from a co‑accused. The petitioner contends that he has been falsely implicated, that the quantity of narcotic falls in the intermediate category, and that no firearm was found in his possession. He also points out his two prior criminal antecedents and that he has been in custody since 1 July 2025 with charges framed on 14 October 2025. The learned A.P.P. opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s antecedents. The court, after considering the submissions, granted bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, imposing several conditions including personal sureties, regular court attendance, reporting to the Superintendent of Police, and verification of criminal antecedents. The order also clarified that any observations made therein would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the nature of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Arms Act and NDPS Act and his criminal antecedents
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 317(5)
- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s. 21(b), 22(b), 8(c)
Subjects
- bail
- NDPS Act
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedent
- intermediate quantity
- court conditions
- high court order
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91304 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2025 Thana- FALKA District- Katihar
======================================================
Devendra Kumar Mahto, Son of Shyam Sundar Mahto, Resident of Village-
Amol, P.S.- Falka, District- Katihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pawan Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner, who is in custody, seeks bail in
connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025 arising out of
Falka P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35 of the Arms Act,
1959 and Sections 8(c), 21(b) and 22(b) of the Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was
apprehended along with another person with smack and 19
pieces of live cartridges.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91304 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/4
petitioner has falsely been implicated and no such recovery as
alleged has been made from his possession. It has been
submitted that even if the quantity of smack is taken into
consideration, only 41.61 grams of smack were recovered,
which falls under the intermediate category. It has next been
submitted that no pistol was recovered from the possession of
the petitioner and in fact the same was recovered from the co-
accused Bambam Yadav. It has further been submitted that the
petitioner has two criminal antecedents and he is in custody
since 01.07.2025. It has lastly been submitted that the charges
have also been framed against the petitioner in the present case
on 14.10.2025.
5. The learned A.P.P. has vehemently opposed the
prayer for bail and
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the
parties, 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 the learned
court below where the case is pending/successor court in
connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 99 of 2025 arising out of
Falka P.S. Case No. 79 of 2025, subject to the following
conditions:-
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91304 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/4
be his close relative and the other shall be local
resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically
present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) 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.
(iv) If the petitioner is found involved in
similar nature of offence in future, the prosecution shall
be at liberty to move for cancellation of his bail bond.
(v) The learned 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.
(vi) In view of the antecedent of the
petitioner, the petitioner is directed to appear before the
Superintendent of Police, Katihar within fifteen days of
his release with a copy of this order and every two
weeks thereafter for the next nine months. The conduct
of the petitioner will be kept under watch in this period
by the Superintendent of Police concerned and if it is
found wanting in any respect, a report shall be made to
the court concerned by him to initiate a proceeding for
cancellation of bail for reasons of misuse of bail. After
reporting to the Superintendent of Police, a certificate
will be filed by the petitioner before the court
concerned.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91304 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
4/4
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
8. It is made clear that the observation, if any, made in
this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
manoj/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.