Yogendra Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31043 of 2026 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53193 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-269 Year-2022 Thana- SARAN COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSaran ====================================================== 1.
Yogendra Mahto S/o Motilal Mahto R/o - Sakin- Puchari, P.O- Puchari, P.S.- Baniyapur, District- Saran, Bihar 2.
Mukesh Mahto S/o Prabhu Mahto R/o - Sakin- Puchari, P.O- Puchari, P.S.- Baniyapur, District- Saran, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Uttam Narayan Singh S/o Late Bindeshwar Singh R/o - Suhai, Sahpur, P.S - Baniyapur, District - Saran, Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Samir Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 15-05-2026 Heard Mr. Samir Kumar, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned Advocate for the State.
2.The petitioners, by filing the present application seeking modification of the order dated 17.12.2024 passed by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 53193 of 2024 whereby the petitioners have been extended the privilege of anticipatory bail, in connection with Complaint Case No. 269 of 2022.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31043 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026 2/3 out of three petitioners, one of the petitioners namely, Niraj Mahto @ Raj Mahto has already surrendered and furnished bail bond. It is further submitted that on account of some unavoidable circumstances and some miscommunication as also the fact that the petitioners were working outside the State of Bihar, they could not ensure their surrender within the stipulated period and furnish bail bond, which was not intentional. They tendered their unqualified apology for the latches and inconvenience caused to the Court.
4. Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that the clear defiance on the part of the petitioners clearly suggest that they are not entitled to any sympathy of this Court.
5. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the averments made in the modification application, the same stands allowed, however, subject to payment of cost of rupees three thousand each, which shall be deposited in the Lawyers Association Benevolent Fund, preferably within a period of two weeks' from today. In case the petitioners deposit the amount of cost and thereafter ensure their surrender and furnish the bail bond within a further period of four weeks', the same shall be accepted.
6. The order stands modified to the extent indicated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31043 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026 3/3 hereinabove.
(Harish Kumar, J) supratim/- U