Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Mahto @ Rahul Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26622 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-274 Year-2023 Thana- SAUR BAZAR District- Saharsa ====================================================== Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Mahto @ Rahul Kumar Mahto Son of Late Lal Bahadur Mahto Resident of Village - Chandour Purvi, Beldari Chandour, P.S. - Saur Bazar, District - Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Amarnath Jha For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Pushpa Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 09-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Saur Bazar P.S. Case No. 274/2023 dated 17.05.2023 registered for the offence punishable u/ss 341, 323, 448, 324, 307, 354A, 427, 379, 504 and 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons came to grab the land of the informant and entered the informant's house. On the exhortation of Salita Devi, the co-accused assaulted the informant with dabiya, causing injury. When the informant's wife came to rescue, the accused persons assaulted the informant's wife and tore her clothes with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26622 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 2/3 bad intention. In the meantime, the the co-accused Avinda Devi and Sunita Devi snatched Mangalsutra of the informant's wife. Further, the co-accused Ganesh Kumar took away the box containing ornaments of the informant's wife, Rs. 15,000 and the documents of the land and the co-accused Salita Devi threatened them to kill.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. There is general and omnibus allegation against the petitioner. Learned counsel has submitted that there is a land dispute between the parties. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. Similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this court vide order dated 23.05.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 32408 of 2024. The petitioner is in custody since 07.01.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner by submitting that there is specific allegation against the petitioner and the injury is stated to be grievous in nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26622 of 2025(2) dt.09-07-2025 3/3 of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Saharsa in connection with Saur Bazar P.S. Case No. 274/2023, with the condition/s:- (i). The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) guddukr/- U T