Jagjitan Mahato v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23059 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-368 Year-2025 Thana- JAMOBAZAR District- Siwan ====================================================== 1.

Jagjitan Mahato (Male), aged about 37 years, Son of Shankar Mahto, Resident of Vill. - Chandan Chhapra, P.S.- Jama Bazar, Dist. - Siwan. 2.

Munna Kumar (Male) aged about 27 years, Son of Mana Bhagat, Resident of Vill. - Chandan Chhapra, P.S.- Jama Bazar, Dist. - Siwan. 3.

Daroga Sah (Male), aged about 45 years, Son of Master Sah, Resident of Vill. - Rampur, P.S.- Jamo Bazar, Dist. - Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Kumari Anupam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Damodar Prasad Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 08-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 121, 121(1), 115, 118(2), 109, 132, 221 and 121(2) of the BNS & 3 and 4 of the Damage of Public Property Act.

3. As per allegation in the FIR, petitioners and other co-accused persons had blocked the road and have also attacked on police officials, due to which, the police vehicle was damaged and agitated persons also attacked on the police officials with a view to kill them and these three petitioners are members of that mob.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. He next

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23059 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026 2/2 submits that the petitioners were not the members of aggressive mob and there is no specific allegation against the petitioners and they have been dragged in this case only due to ill motive. Petitioners have got clean antecedent as stated in para-3 of the petition.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that the petitioners are indulged in damaging the government property and also blocked the road.

6. On perusal of the first information report and impugned order dated 23.02.2026, it appears that on police patrolling duty, the petitioners and several other accused persons were indulged in blocking the road and damaged the police vehicle, as a result of which, the government official vehicle and other articles were damaged and petitioners were named in the FIR, so I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the above named three petitioners is hereby rejected. (Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T