Rakesh Mahto @ Rakesh Kumar Bhagat @ Rakesh Mahato v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8048 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-299 Year-2024 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Rakesh Mahto @ Rakesh Kumar Bhagat @ Rakesh Mahato S/o Ram Daresh Mahto R/o village - Harsingpur Panchayat Manik Chowk Utari ward no. -2 @ Harsingpur, Panchayat -Manik Chowk North ward no. -2, P.S. -Garha @ Gadha, Dist. - Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jai Narain Thakur, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 06-03-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 117(2), 76, 303(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has antecedent of one case and the informant alleges that on account of land dispute, the accused persons came and Rakesh Mahto (petitioner) assaulted Chanda Devi by Kudal on head causing injury, thereafter Damodar Mahto assaulted Laxman Mahto by lathi on head. Further, Anita Devi assaulted Chandani Devi on back by an iron rod. Further, Kanchan Devi assaulted Sulekha Kumari with bricks on head while Shail Devi assaulted Anita Devi by hasua on head.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8048 of 2025(2) dt.06-03-2025 2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant on account of dispute relating to land. It is further submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting then the injury suffered by Chanda Devi, no doubt is on vital part of the body i.e. head, but then the same has been opined to be simple and the blow was not repeated.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with Runnisaidpur P.S. Case No. 299 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the BNSS. (Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T