Allowed

Jai Prakash Mahto @ Jai Prakash Mahoto v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Aug 2026CR. APP (SJ)/311/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court set aside the Sessions Judge's order rejecting anticipatory bail. The appellant, charged under BNS and SC/ST (BOA) Act, was permitted bail within six weeks of arrest or surrender upon furnishing sureties.

What did the court decide?

Appeal allowed; previous order set aside; appellant to be released on bail within six weeks of arrest/surrender by furnishing sum of Rs. 5,000/- with two sureties.

Jai Prakash Mahto @ Jai Prakash Mahoto Vs The State of Bihar — Caste Atrocities | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.311 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2025 Thana- SC/ST District- Jehanabad

¶3

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

¶4

Jai Prakash Mahto @ Jai Prakash Mahoto, S/o Vijay Mahto @ Ram Vijay Singh R/o Village - Nadiyawa, P.S - Kako, District - Jehanabad

¶5

... ... Appellant/s Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar 2. Manish Kumar, S/o Vinda Paswan R/o Village - Nadiyawa, P.S - Kako, District - Jehanabad

¶7

... ... Respondent/s

¶8

====================================================== Appearance : For the Appellant/s : Mr. Abhishek Anand- Advocate Mr. Shubhankar Raj- Advocate Mr. Amartya Raj- Advocate Mr. Mohd Sadiq Hasnain- Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna- Spl.P.P. Mr. Dheeraj Kumar- Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶9

4 17-08-2026

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, the learned

¶11

counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and the learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶12

The appellant has challenged the order dated 07.01.2026 passed by the learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judgecum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Jehanabad in connection with ABP No.1930 of 2025 arising out of Jehanabad SC/ST P. S. Case No.34 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 303(2), 352 and 351(2) of the B.N.S. and Sections 3(i)(r)(s), 3(2)(va) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby his

¶13

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.311 of 2026(4) dt.17-08-2026 2/4

¶14

prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected.

¶15

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶16

appellant submits that appellant has antecedent of two cases, but then, both the cases have been instituted from the side of the informant and the informant alleges that on 12.10.2025 at 8.30 P.M., he had gone to the market for purchasing biscuit, when five named accused persons including the appellant intercepted him and abused by taking caste name and threatened to kill if he will not compromise the case. On protest, accused Praveen assaulted by sharp edged weapon causing injury on left hand requiring four stitches. Further, Dina and Sanjay assaulted by lathi all over his body while appellant and Praveen had caught him. It is next alleged that earlier Kako P. S. Case No.337 of 2023 was instituted against the accused persons.

¶17

The learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that appellant is not alleged to have assaulted rather informant alleges that appellant along with Praveen caught him and Dina and Sanjay assaulted all over his body. It is further submitted that had appellant and Praveen caught the informant, in that

¶18

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.311 of 2026(4) dt.17-08-2026 3/4

¶19

event, Dina and Sanjay could not have assaulted the informant by lathi all over his body as in the assault even appellant along with Praveen would have been injured. It is also submitted that on the date of occurrence, the informant was in a drunken condition, as such, there was an altercation, since from the side of the appellant also two cases were instituted against the informant and his side and the informant was handed over to the police for having committed an offence under the Excise Act and thus, the informant was remanded to judicial custody, but after three days was released on bail and thereafter, the instant case came to be instituted, as such, there is a delay of three days in instituting the instant FIR. It is next submitted that since dispute in between the side of the appellant and the informant is going on, as such, the instant false case came to be instituted.

¶20

The learned Special P. P. as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant opposes the bail application. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant that a case was instituted on the date of occurrence against the informant in which he was sent to judicial custody under the Excise Act and after being released on bail, the instant FIR came to be

¶21

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.311 of 2026(4) dt.17-08-2026 4/4

¶22

instituted.

¶23

Regard being had to the aforesaid submissions, the

¶24

order dated 07.01.2026 is set-aside.

¶25

The appeal stands allowed.

¶26

The appellant, above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 1^st Additional Sessions Judge-cumSpecial Judge, SC/ST, Jehanabad in connection with ABP No.1930 of 2025 arising out of Jehanabad SC/ST P. S. Case No.34 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

¶27

(Satyavrat Verma, J)

¶28

vikash/-

¶29

U T

Jai Prakash Mahto @ Jai Prakash Mahoto v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Prakash Mahto @ Jai Prakash Mahoto 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

Gaur Chandra Sinha Vs The State of Bihar

Brajesh Nandan Singh @ Brijesh Nandan Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Raju Kumar @ Ravi Shankar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Vijay Kumar @ Vijay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Bimlesh Kumar Pandey Vs The State of Bihar

Umang Mishra @ Umang Kumar Mishra Vs The State of Bihar