Mantu Mahto @ Mantu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42864 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2024 Thana- EKMA District- Saran ====================================================== Mantu Mahto @ Mantu Kumar S/o Dhan Kishore Mahto R/o VillageGangawa, PS- Ekma, District- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nawnit Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 25-07-2025 Heard Mr. Nawnit Kumar Tiwary, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 354, 506 and 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner caught hold of the informant with her hair and knocked her down. When her mother came to rescue, it is alleged that the petitioner assaulted with knife on the mother of the informant. It is further alleged that when the informant went to rescue her mother, she was also assaulted with knife. It is further alleged that Mantu Mahto (the petitioner) assaulted with kudaal on the head of the informant's mother. From perusal of the record it transpires that the mother of the informant succumbed to the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42864 of 2025(3) dt.25-07-2025 2/2 injuries and the post-mortem report goes to show that the deceased was having multiple incised wound over frontal bone of different size.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the weapon of assault was khanti which was recovered but it does not contain any blood. The petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and he is in judicial custody since 08.05.2024.

5. Learned APP appearing for the state has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail. He submits that the petitioner is the main assailant of the deceased.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage since the petitioner is the main assailant, however, the petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months if the trial is not concluded. Learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial.

7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands dismissed.

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) durgesh/- U T