Ranjeet Mahto @ Ranjeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18016 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2025 Thana- BIHARIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== Ranjeet Mahto @ Ranjeet Kumar S/o Late Shambhu Mahto Resident of village- Gangora, Ward No 01, PS- Bihariganj, District- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Barun Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State through virtual mode.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 141 of 2025 dated 06.04.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Section/s 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 126(2), 75(2), 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is of assaulting with Gadasha on the head of the Informant's daughter-in-law, namely, Ganita Devi due to which she sustained severe rupture-injury on her head.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case on account of previous land dispute between the parties. It
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18016 of 2026(5) dt.20-05-2026 2/3 is next submitted that for the incident which took place on 29.03.2025, the F.I.R. is said to have been lodged on 06.04.2025 and, thus, there is delay of altogether nine days without there being any plausible explanation for such delay. It is further submitted that both the parties are agnates. It is next submitted that though the allegation against the petitioner is of assaulting Ganita Devi by means of Gadasha causing incised injury but, in the injury report, it has been mentioned that the injury is caused by hard and blunt substance, which is simple in nature. Lastly, it is submitted that the petitioner is a person of clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having considered the fact that both the parties are agnates and allegations made in the F.I.R. are not corroborated with the nature of injury sustained and the injury being simple in nature, let the petitioner, above named, be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest or surrender before the 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 learned SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Udakishunganj, Madhepura in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18016 of 2026(5) dt.20-05-2026 3/3 connection with Bihariganj P.S. Case No. 141 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. as well as the following conditions; (i) One of the bailors should be the family member/relative/known of the petitioner, who shall provide official document / personal affidavit to show his/her bona fide; (ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself; (iii) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds.
(Ajit Kumar, J) rishi/- U T