Vijay Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23477 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-365 Year-2024 Thana- BARH District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Vijay Mahto Son of Lakhan Mahto R/O Village- Sahari, P.S.- Barh, DistrictPatna 2.
Munilal Kumar @ Munilal Son of Vijay Mahto R/O Village- Sahari, P.S.- Barh, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Brahmaputra Singh Ishu, Adv.
Ms. Poonam Kumari, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2025
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 307, 120(B), 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that she is having dispute with her husband, namely, Mritunjay Singh on issue of divorce, further she along with her mother, brother and others had gone to see her land, where from before, her husband along with the named accused persons including the petitioners were hiding and her husband fired
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23477 of 2025(2) dt.30-04-2025 2/3 twice causing injury on her head, and thereafter, fired at her mother, causing injury near her ear, waist and left hand, on hearing the gunshot, the villagers started gathering, when the accused persons fled away.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case, as they support Mritunjay. It is also submitted that specific allegation of firing is against Mritunjay but then since the petitioners are known to Mritunjay, as such, the informant took the same as an opportunity to implicate them also with an allegation that they were also present at the place of occurrence.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the event of their 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) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Barh P.S. Case No.365/2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23477 of 2025(2) dt.30-04-2025 3/3 Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T