Partly allowed

Devi Lal Mahto @ Devi Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Nov 2023CR. MISC./39794/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed the petition of Suraj Kumar for anticipatory bail on furnishing a bail bond with two sureties, subject to standard conditions. Permission was also accorded to withdraw the application regarding the first petitioner, which was dismissed as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted to petitioner no. 2 on furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties. Application of petitioner no. 1 dismissed as withdrawn.

Devi Lal Mahto @ Devi Mahto Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39794 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-260 Year-2022 Thana- ARIYARI District- Sheikhpura

¶3

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

¶4

Devi Lal Mahto @ Devi Mahto Son of Badri Mahto Resident of VillageNabinagar Kakrar, Ps- Ariyari, District- Sheikhpura

¶5

Suraj Kumar Son of Kushal Mahto @ Khushilal Mahto Resident of VillageNabinagar Kakrar, Ps- Ariyari, District- Sheikhpura

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bipin Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 06-11-2023

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to remove the defect(s), as pointed out by the office, if any, within a period of three weeks from today.

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the present application with respect to petitioner no.1 (Devi Lal Mahto).

¶15

Permission is accorded.

¶16

Accordingly, the present application with respect to the petitioner no.1 (Devi Lal Mahto) is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶17

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39794 of 2023(4) dt.06-11-2023 2/3

¶19

connection with Ariyari P.S Case No. 260 of 2022 dated 07.10.2022 registered for the offence punishable u/ss 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 354, 379, 506 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

¶20

7. As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that while he had gone to take water from the government handpump where one Sandeep Kumar abused him by calling his caste name and started assaulting him. Thereafter, F.I.R. named accused holding weapons came there and also started assaulting the informant and his family members.

¶21

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is further submitted that there is a case and counter case between the parties. Learned counsel has further submitted that as per injury report, the injuries are simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substance. Similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order 06.09.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 37969 of 2023. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition.

¶22

9. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39794 of 2023(4) dt.06-11-2023 3/3

¶24

10. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner no.2 (Suraj Kumar), in the event of his arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on anticipatory bail on furnishing bailbond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court concerned, Sheikhpura in connection with Ariyari P.S. Case No. 260 of 2022, subject to conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶25

11. The application stands allowed.

¶26

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶27

Nilmani/-

Devi Lal Mahto @ Devi Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devi Lal Mahto @ Devi Mahto 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

Rajiv Mahto @ Rajiv Vs the State of Bihar

Vikash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sanju Srivastava Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Imarn Vs the State of Bihar

Niranjan Yadav @ Niranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Daud @ Daud Vs the State of Bihar