Sanjeet Kumar Mahto @ Sanjeet Mahto @ Sanjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16087 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-358 Year-2024 Thana- BAKHARI District- Begusarai ====================================================== Sanjeet Kumar Mahto @ Sanjeet Mahto @ Sanjeet Kumar S/O Tunlal Mahto R/O Village- Makkhachak, Ward No. 20, P.S.- Bakhari, District- Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shashank Chouhan For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 02-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioner apprehending his arrest in connection with Bakhari P.S Case No. 358 of 2024 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 115(2), 118(1), 352, 351(2), 308(5), 3(5) of the BNS.
3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that petitioner along with co-accused have assaulted the informant and demanded extortion of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that allegation of assault is general in nature and also no specific allegation against the petitioner. Petitioner is falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16087 of 2025(2) dt.02-04-2025 2/2 implicated in this case.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. From perusal of the F.I.R., impugned order, it appears that allegation against the petitioner is specific that he has demand extortion money from the informant by putting the informant in fear of death. Petitioner has got nine criminal antecedents. some offences are similar in nature and some are serious in nature.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, material on record and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Mayank/- U T