Patna High Court
Suraj Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ANIL KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Suraj Kumar Mahto was charged under IPC sections 302 and 34 and Arms Act section 27 for allegedly being the driver of a motorcycle used by the shooter who killed an informant's brother. The petitioner argued he was unaware of the shooting plan, had no criminal record, and that the motorcycle did not belong to him. The informant's counsel countered that CCTV footage showed the petitioner with the shooter at the time of the incident. The court noted that this was the third bail application, the petitioner had been in custody for about two years, and the trial had shown no substantial progress. Considering these factors, the court granted regular bail on a bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties, subject to attendance conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused charged with murder and arms offences when the trial has not progressed substantially and the accused has been in custody for an extended period.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- trial delay
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.92024 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2024 Thana- KANKARBAG District- Patna
======================================================
Suraj Kumar Mahto S/O late Harendra Mahto R/O Tripoilia, Near Noorani
Bagh Colony Park, P.S- Alamganj, Dist.- Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhimanyu Deo
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pradeep Narain Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA
ORAL ORDER
5 03-04-2026 1. Heard the parties.
2. This is third attempt for regular bail on behalf of the
petitioner in connection with Kankarbagh P.S. Case No. 237 of
2024 dated 04.04.2024 registered for the offence under Section
302, 34 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. This court while rejecting the application of the
petitioner earlier vide order dated 13.12.2024 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 78762 of 2024 granted liberty to the petitioner to
renew his prayer for bail after one year if the trial does not show
any substantial progress.
4. As per the prosecution case the brother of the informant
working as a vendor in Anamika Indane Gas Agency was shot
dead by two unknown persons, who was riding on a motorcycle.
The petitioner was driving the motorcycle on which the shooter
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92024 of 2025(5) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
was sitting who shot dead the informant’s brother.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner
has been implicated in this case on the basis of the fact that he
was driving the motorcycle at the time of occurrence when the
pillion rider Sandeep Kumar Yadav shot the informant’s brother
dead on the road. Learned counsel next submits that the
motorcycle in question does not belong to the petitioner and the
co-accused Sandeep Kumar Yadav without informing the
petitioner about his intention to kill somebody told the petitioner
to drive the motorcycle belonging to his sister. In the
confessional statement also the co-accused Rahul Kumar did not
disclose the name of the petitioner as one of the conspirators of
the offence. The money which was paid for killing the deceased
was given by Rahul Kumar. The petitioner is having no criminal
antecedent and he is in custody since 06.04.2024.
6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant
opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is the
friend of the main accused Sandeep Kumar Yadav and he has
been seen in the CCTV footage along with Sandeep Kumar
Yadav at the time of occurrence driving the motorcycle.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone
through the report submitted pursuant to the order passed by this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.92024 of 2025(5) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
court on 09.01.2026 regarding the present stage of the trial. The
report has been submitted by J.M.F.C.-02, Patna vide letter no.
107 dated 12.02.2026 in which it has been stated that on
16.02.2026 the case has been committed to the court of session.
8. Considering the submissions made by the parties, the fact
that this is third attempt for bail on behalf of the petitioner, the
petitioner has remained in custody for about two years and trial
has not shown any substantial progress during this period,
accordingly, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
9. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on regular
bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000 /- (twenty thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned CJM, Patna in connection with Kankarbagh P.S. Case
No. 237 of 2024 subject to the condition that the petitioner shall
remain present before the trial court on each and every date and
in case of default on two consecutive dates without prior
permission of the trial court, his bail bond shall liable to be
cancelled.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J)
praful/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.