Arun Mahto @ Arun Kumar Mahto v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39278 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2024 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Purnia ====================================================== 1.
Arun Mahto @ Arun Kumar Mahto Son of Ram Sewak Mahto Resident of Village- Hasaili Khutti, P.s.- Sri Nagar (K. Nagar), Distt.-Purnia 2.
Pintu Kumar Son of Arun Mahto Resident of Village- Hasaili Khutti, P.s.- Sri Nagar (K. Nagar), Distt.-Purnia ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Khushboo Kumari Daughter of Raj Kumar Mahto Resident of VillageHasaili Khutti, P.O.- Srinagar (K. Nagar), Distt.- Purnia-854304 ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Chandra Shekhar Anand, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 01-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State. 2.The instant application for anticipatory bail has been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in connection with Purnia Mahila P.S. Case No. 62 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 64, 351(2), 351(3) of the B.N.S.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the informant was on talking terms with Niranjan Kumar, who is son of petitioner No. 1. Further case of the prosecution is that Niranjan Kumar established physical relationship with the informant on false promise of marriage. It is further alleged that when the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39278 of 2025(2) dt.01-07-2025 2/3 informant called a Panchayat for forcing marriage on Niranjan, the petitioners objected for the same.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners have submitted that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence. They have falsely been implicated in this case. He also submits that the petitioners are father and brother of Niranjan Kumar. Specific allegation is against Niranjan. Only allegation against these petitioners are that in Panchayati, they have objected the marriage of the informant with Niranjan. It is further submitted that the petitioners are having no criminal antecedent.
5. In contra, learned APP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. The petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrender in connection with Purnia Mahila P.S. Case No. 62 of 2024, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39278 of 2025(2) dt.01-07-2025 3/3 Magistrate, Purnia subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Sudhanshu/- U T