Ranjay Mahto @ Sanjay Mahto @ Injay Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13748 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2024 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Ranjay Mahto @ Sanjay Mahto @ Injay Mahto Son of Jagdish Mahto VillChako Chhapara, PS- Minapur, District- Muzuffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Ram Pukar Mahto Son of Late Ramsawroop Mahto village and PostKushahar, Ps- Tariyani, Dist- Sheohar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Paswan, Advocate Mr. Amar Kumar, Advocate Ms. Deepshikha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 18-06-2025 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 Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation in the first information report is that the informant received an information that his son was killed by the petitioner and co-accused, Pappu Kumar by strangulation under a conspiracy hatched against him. The dead body of the deceased person was found hanging from a Litchi tree.
4. At the very outset, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that it would appear from the first information
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13748 of 2025(3) dt.18-06-2025 2/3 report itself that the informant is not an eye witness to the case and the first information report is based on hearsay information and the source of such information has not been disclosed. It is further submitted that the first information report has been lodged after a delay of 8 days which makes the entire story of the prosecution suspicious. It is further submitted that the petitioner is the brother-in-law (Sarhu) of the deceased. On the intervention of the relatives and well wishers of the parties, a compromise has entered into between them and the said compromise petition has been brought on record by way of Annexure-P/2. It is also pointed out that similarly situated coaccused, Pappu Kumar has already been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.5958 of 2025.
5. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13748 of 2025(3) dt.18-06-2025 3/3 Ahiyapur P.S. Case No.234 of 2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Soni Shrivastava, J) Trivedi/- U T