Sujit Kumar @ Sujit Kumar Mahto @ Sujit Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35556 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-235 Year-2018 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== Sujit Kumar @ Sujit Kumar Mahto @ Sujit Mahto S/o Late Jago Mahto R/o Village- Lohra, P.S.- Jamui, District- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Eashita Raj, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 20-06-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. 2.

The present petition is by way of second attempt at the behest of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 235 of 2018, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 379, 307, 447, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

The case of the prosecution, in brief, according to the informant, is that on 08.05.2018, at about 04:00 p.m., the patidar (agnate) of the informant, namely Sujit Mahto (petitioner) and one

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35556 of 2025(2) dt.20-06-2025 2/3 another started cutting the palm trees of the informant and when the informant had protested, the petitioner and one another had abused the informant resulting in him returning back to his home. It is further alleged that subsequently, the petitioner armed with iron rod and one Ravish Kumar @ Ravish Mahto, armed with khanti, had come to the door of the house of the informant and had assaulted the informant resulting in him sustaining head injuries, whereafter the accused persons had also assaulted the brother of the informant, who had also sustained serious injuries. The petitioner is also alleged to have snatched a sum of Rs. 5,000/- from the informant.

4.

The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the injury sustained by the injured persons are not so grievous so as to detain the petitioner in custody any longer especially in view of the fact that he has already remained in custody for a period of more than one year, hence he has already been suitably punished.

5.

Per contra, the learned A.P.P. for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35556 of 2025(2) dt.20-06-2025 3/3 State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. 6.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the materials available on record as also considering the fact that the petitioner has been languishing in custody since more than one year, I deem it fit and proper to admit the petitioner to the privilege of bail.

7.

Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Jamui in connection with Jamui P.S. Case No. 235 of 2018.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) S.Sb/- U T