← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./47939/2025bail granted

Madan Mahto @ Madan Mahato @ Madan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-10-17Mr. Justice Ajit Kumar5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47123 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2025 Thana- Rangara District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Savita Devi @ Sarita Devi Wife of Manoj Mahato @ Manoj Mahto Resident of Village- Koshkipur, P.S.- Rangra, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 47939 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2025 Thana- Rangara District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Madan Mahto @ Madan Mahato @ Madan Kumar S/o- Chhote Lal Mahto @ Chhote Lal Mahato Resident of village- Koshkipur, P. S- Rangra, DistrictKatihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 48051 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2025 Thana- Rangara District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== MANOJ MAHTO @ MANOJ MAHATO S/O CHHOTE LAL MAHTO @ CHHOTE LAL MAHATO R/O VILL.- KOSHKIPUR, P.S. RANGRA, DIST.- BHAGALPUR ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 47123 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajendra Prasad Sah, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jai Narain Thakur, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 47939 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajendra Prasad Sah, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Abhay Kumar, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 48051 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rajendra Prasad Sah, adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Abhay Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-10-2025 Since all the three aforementioned applications for

2/5 anticipatory bail arise out of same PS Case i.e., Rangra PS Case No. 16 of 2025, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

2. Heard Mr. Rajendra Prasad Sah, learned counsel for the petitioners in all the three applications for anticipatory bail and learned APP.

3. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Rangra PS Case No. 16 of 2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 61(2), 103(1), 3(5) of the BNS and Section 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, and 35 of the Arms Act lodged on 21.01.2025 by the informant.

4. As per the first information report, the daughter of the informant was married with one Vitthi Mahto in the year 2017 and after marriage the brother-in-law, sister-in-law and other family members of the deceased used to torture and harass the daughter of the informant. On 21.01.2025, in the evening, the informant's daughter informed her on phone that the petitioner along with other accused persons, total 10 in number, were conspiring to kill her and stated that she was scared and asked the informant to come to her matrimonial home. While the informant was preparing for proceeding to the matrimonial home of her daughter, she received the call of her grandson on mobile, who said that the co-accused / Mangna Mahto (uncle) had shot his

3/5 mother. After that, she proceeded towards the matrimonial home of her daughter where she saw dead body of her daughter and all family members had fled away. Accordingly, the FIR.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case due to family dispute and they have not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioner of Cr. Misc. No. 47123 of 2025, Savita Devi is Gotni of deceased, petitioner of Cr. Misc. No. 47939 of 2025, Madan Mahto @ Madan Mahato is brother-in-law (Bhainsur) of the deceased and the petitioner of Cr. Misc. No. 48051 of 2025, Manoj Mahto @ Manoj Mahato is also the brother-in-law (Bhainsur) of the deceased and the allegation against them as per the FIR are general and omnibus in nature. There is no specific allegation of any overt-act against these petitioners.

Moreover, the son of the deceased, who is said to be an eyewitness of the occurrence, has categorically stated in his statement that one Magna Mahto had shot the deceased causing instantaneous death. It has also been submitted that all the petitioners have got clean antecedent. It has next been submitted that similarly situated co-accused persons, namely, Najo Mandal in Cr. Misc. No. 35842 of 2025 vide order dated 18.06.2025 and Vinay Sah @ Vinay Kumar in Cr. Misc. No. 49954 of 2025 vide order dated 11.08.

4/5 anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Benches of this Court.

6. On the other hand, learned APP vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners submitting that there has been a murder of a young lady and the petitioners are said to be the accomplices in the said occurrence.

7. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the parties and the fact that the allegations against these petitioners are general and omnibus in nature, there is direct allegation of murder against one Mangna Mahto and similarly situated co-accused persons, as stated above, have been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Benches, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege of anticipatory bail.

8. Let the petitioners, above named, be released on bail, in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks, from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- 1st , Naugachia, District- Bhagalpur in connection with Rangra P.S. Case No. 16 of 2025, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S. 2023 as well as the following conditions:- (i) one of the bailors should be the family member/relative of the petitioners who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;

5/5 (ii) the petitioners shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;

(iii) the petitioners shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail (iv) the petitioners shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.

(Ajit Kumar, J) perwez U T