Sunil Mahto @ Apresh Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Aditya Raj, Advocate For the State : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, SPP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

5 02-07-2026

¶12

Despite of valid service of notice upon Respondent

¶13

No.2, no one appears on behalf of Respondent No.2.

¶14

Learned counsel for the appellant is permitted to make necessary corrections in paragraph no.1 of the memo of appeal.

¶15

Heard Mr. Aditya Raj, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Ms. Usha Kumari 1, learned Spl.P.P. for the State.

¶16

This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 19.03.2026 passed by the learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge-1stcum-Special Judge-SC/ST, Saharsa in connection with Saharsa

¶17

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1330 of 2026(5) dt.02-07-2026 2/4

¶18

SC/ST P.S. Case No. 61 of 2025, F.I.R. dated 04.12.2025 registered under Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 109, 74, 303(1), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita and Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(wi), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act.

¶19

According to the prosecution case, the informant alleged that on 02.12.2025 at about12 noon,when his son went to the house of Anil Mahto to demand his wages, the appellant along with other accused persons abused him and denied giving him any money and tied him to a pillar and mercilessly beat him. When the informant went to rescue her son, she was also assaulted. The accused persons snatched her gold earrings worth of Rs.35,000/-.

¶20

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that although the appellant is named in the FIR but from bare perusal of FIR it appears that there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act against this appellant rather specific allegation of assault is against co-accused persons, namely, Himanshu, Manu, Avinash and Vishal. He next submits that it appears from the FIR that the alleged occurrence took place inside the house of co-accused,

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1330 of 2026(5) dt.02-07-2026 3/4

¶22

which is not a public place, so no case is made out under SC/ST Act. He further submits that the police, after investigation, submitted charge sheet against the appellant. The appellant is in custody since 09.12.2025.

¶23

Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the appellant, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court of Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special JudgeSC/ST, Saharsa in connection with Saharsa SC/ST P.S. Case No. 61 of 2025, with other following conditions:-

¶25

i. Appellant 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 his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

¶26

ii. If the appellant tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

¶27

iii. And further condition that the court below shall

¶28

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1330 of 2026(5) dt.02-07-2026 4/4

¶29

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

¶30

Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and this appeal stands allowed.

¶31

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶32

Suruchi/-

¶33

U T

Sunil Mahto @ Apresh Mahto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Mahto @ Apresh 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

Mahesh Kumar Mahto @ bhula @ Mahesh Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Kamlesh Sahani @ Kamelsh Ram @ Kamelsh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Diwana Kumar @ Madhusudan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mithilesh Bind @ Mithilesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Kajal Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Hemant Tiwari @ Hemant Kumar Tiwari Vs The State of Bihar