Allowed

Niranjan Mahato @ Manoranjan Mahato @ Manoranjan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC27 Jul 2022CR. MISC./9957/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Patna granted bail to two petitioners charged under Sections 363, 366A IPC, Section 12 POCSO, and Section 3(i)(r) of SC/ST POA Act. The court imposed standard bail conditions including cooperation in trial, presence in court, and no tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail upon furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000/- each with two sureties of like amount each, subject to specified conditions.

Niranjan Mahato @ Manoranjan Mahato @ Manoranjan Vs The State… — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9957 of 2022

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-428 Year-2021 Thana- JOGAPATTI District- West Champaran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

NIRANJAN MAHATO @ MANORANJAN MAHATO @ MANORANJAN S/o Shivbalak Mahto R/o Village - Laxmipur, P.S. - Yogapatti, District - West Champaran.

¶5

SHIVBALAK MAHATO S/o Banshi Mahato R/o Village - Laxmipur, P.S. - Yogapatti, District - West Champaran.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶10

4 27-07-2022

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶12

The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the offence under Sections 363, 366A, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 12 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(i)(r) of SC/ST (POA) Act.

¶13

The daughter of the informant is said to have been abducted by the petitioners and their associates for the purpose of performing marriage to one Gulshan Kumar.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners, who are of clean antecedent, are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9957 of 2022(4) dt.27-07-2022 2/3

¶16

only on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that in fact the victim has been recovered and her statement has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has not stated anything against the petitioners. He further submits that the victim in her statement has categorically stated that she herself gone to her Mausi (aunt), therefore, no case under Section 366A of the Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioners. The petitioners are rotting in judicial custody since 04.01.2022.

¶17

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the, above named, petitioners be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Yogapatti P.S. Case No. 428 of 2021 with the following conditions:-

¶19

(1) Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9957 of 2022(4) dt.27-07-2022 3/3

¶21

sufficient reason, their bail bond shall be canceled by the Court below.

¶22

(2) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶23

And, further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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.

¶24

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶25

brajesh/-

¶26

U T

Niranjan Mahato @ Manoranjan Mahato @ Manoranjan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niranjan Mahato @ Manoranjan Mahato @ Manoranjan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohan Lal Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Wasim @ Wasim Vs the State of Bihar

Pramod Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Lalu Sahni @ Chhote Sarkar Vs The State of Bihar

Munna Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar