Allowed

Kaul Mahto @ Rajkishore Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC2 Apr 2025CR. MISC./17800/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Eight family members facing arrest for an armed assault under Sections 341 to 506/34 IPC sought anticipatory bail. Citing simple injuries, general allegations and a compromise between the parties, the court granted bail on surrender within eight weeks with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail: release on furnishing Rs. 10,000 bail bond each with two like sureties upon arrest/surrender within eight weeks, subject to Section 482(2) BNSS conditions.

Kaul Mahto @ Rajkishore Mahto Vs The State of Bihar — Anticipatory Bail | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17800 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2020 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran

¶3

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

¶4

Kaul Mahto @ Rajkishore Mahto Son of Banka Mahto R/O-VillageMananpur, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari

¶5

Teras Mahto Son of Banka Mahto R/O-Village- Mananpur, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari

¶6

Sunil Mahto Son of Banka Mahto R/O-Village- Mananpur, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari

¶7

Anil Mahto Son of Banka Mahto R/O-Village- Mananpur, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari

¶8

Guddu Mahto Son of Banka Mahto R/O-Village- Mananpur, P.S.Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari

¶9

Banka Mahto Son of Babulal Mahto R/O-Village- Mananpur, P.S.Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari

¶10

Rambha Devi Wife of Teras Mahto R/O-Village- Mananpur, P.S.Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari

¶11

Nisha Kumari D/O- Teras Mahto R/O-Village- Mananpur, P.S.- Kalyanpur, District- East Champaran at Motihari

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶16

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

¶17

Appearance :

¶18

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP

¶19

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶20

2 02-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned

¶21

APP for the State.

¶22

In this present case, the petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 118 of 2020, registered on 01.06.2020 for the offences

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17800 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 2/4

¶24

under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶25

As per prosecution case, petitioners and other coaccused persons armed with lathi, garasi, farsa and bhala , came to the doors of the informant and petitioner no.1 gave farsa blow to the informant on his head. Other family members of the informant were also assaulted and the assailants took away gold locket and mobile phone from the informant and his family members.

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The present case is counter blast of Kalyanpur P.S. Case 117 of 2020 which was lodged by son of petitioner no.6 against informant side for the assault on the petitioners’ side in which a number of persons from petitioners’ side received injuries. The injury caused by petitioner no.1 to the informant is stated to be simple though it is alleged to be a injury caused by farsa . Similarly, injury caused by petitioner no.5 is also stated to be simple. Allegation against other petitioners is general and nonspecific. Learned counsel further submits that though from the facts of the case, no offence under Section 307 of IPC is made out against the petitioners, however, the parties have entered

¶27

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17800 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 3/4

¶28

into a compromise and filed a compromise petition before the learned trial court. Petitioner nos. 2, 4 and 6 are having one criminal antecedent whereas other petitioners are having clean antecedent.

¶29

Learned APP opposes the prayer for anticipatory

¶30

bail.

¶31

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the simple nature of injuries of the victims and also considering the general and omnibus allegations without any substantive material against the petitioners, let the petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court concerned within a period of eight weeks from today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, East Champaran/concerned court in connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 118 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. and other following conditions:

¶32

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioners.

¶33

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17800 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 4/4

¶34

(ii) The petitioners will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required

¶35

by the learned trial court.

¶36

(Arun Kumar Jha, J)

¶37

balmukund/-

¶38

U T

Kaul Mahto @ Rajkishore Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaul Mahto @ Rajkishore 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

Urmila Kumari @ Urmila Sharma Vs Krishna Murari Sharma @ Murari Sharma

Sri Suresh Prasad Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Shivji Rai @ Shiv Narayan Rai Vs Ranjit Kumar Rai

Dharmendra Jha Vs The State of Bihar

Raj Kali Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Tahir @ Md. Tahir Arman Vs The State of Bihar