Samnath Mahto @ Shyam Nath Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42657 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2025 Thana- MUFFASIL District- West Champaran

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

Samnath Mahto @ Shyam Nath Mahto S/O Late Kusha Mahto R/O VillageMahanagani, PS- Bettiah Muffasil, district- West Champaran

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Mili Kumari For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lakshmi Kant Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 01-09-2025

¶12

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

¶13

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025 dated 11.01.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 308(4), 308(5), 140(2) read with Section 3(5) of B.N.S. and Section 25(9) of the Arms Act.

¶14

3. As per the prosecution case, the informant, namely, Shiv Pujan Mahto, was working in the Rice Mill of one Bhola Sah at Mahna Gani and on 11.01.2025 at about 2.00 P.M., Ravi Kumar @ Pinnu came with the accused persons, namely, Shamnath Mahto and Diwakar Thakur on his black Fortuner vehicle and called the informant. It is further alleged that when

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42657 of 2025(2) dt.01-09-2025 2/3

¶16

the informant came then the co-accused Ravi Kumar abused and assaulted him and on the point of pistol, brought him at his ‘Pushpanjali Hotel’, Bettiah and took his signature of back dated 18.11.2024 and also took thumb impression of his five fingers. It is further alleged that the co-accused Ravi Kumar also took the signature on two blank papers from the informant and also told him to give up the land of Khata No. 18, Khesra No. 2915, and area 10 dhur situated at village-Mahana Gani beside the road otherwise he would be killed. It is further alleged that the co-accused Ravi Kumar told the informant that now the coaccused Ravi Kumar is the owner of the above said land from today and then the co-accused Ravi Kumar set free the informant near his G.D. Goyenka School.

¶17

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is submitted that the petitioner looks after buses of G.D. Goyanka School, Lalgarh, Bettiah. It is further submitted that the land dispute is going on between the parties with regard to Khata No. 18, Khesra No. 2915, measuring an area 10 dhurs and for that Title Suit No. 144 of 2023 is also pending between the informant and the co-accused,

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42657 of 2025(2) dt.01-09-2025 3/3

¶19

Ravi @ Pinnu. The other co-accused person has already been granted bail by this court vide order dated 25.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 17186/2025. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 13.01.2025.

¶20

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner.

¶21

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, West Champaran, Bettiah in connection with Bettiah Muffasil P.S. Case No. 21 of 2025, with the condition ;-

¶22

(i). The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

¶23

7. The application stands allowed.

¶24

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶25

atul/-

¶26

U T

Samnath Mahto @ Shyam Nath Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samnath Mahto @ Shyam Nath Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Sao Vs The State of Bihar

Shailesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Upendra Kumar @ Upendra Ray Vs The State of Bihar

Gandhi Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjeevan Chaudhary @ Sanjeevan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Binod Rajbhar @ Binod Kumar Vs The State of Bihar