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

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73663 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-212 Year-2025 Thana- SISWAN District- Siwan ====================================================== Anil Mahto @ Anil Kumar Mahato son of Hiralal Mahato Village -Kachnar PS -Siswan, Dist- siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Subodh Kumar Barnwal For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Sevak Choudhary ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-12-2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Siswan P.S. Case No.212/2025, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352 of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that her husband had gone to the house of Anil for demanding his wages, when Anil started abusing and thereafter a fight ensued and her husband was stabbed in the stomach.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that from perusal of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73663 of 2025(2) dt.01-12-2025 2/2 allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that informant alleges that her husband had gone to the house of petitioner to demand his wages when the occurrence is alleged to have taken place. It is also submitted that the husband of the informant also assaulted the petitioner and the petitioner also got injured.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that there is a specific allegation that husband of the informant was stabbed in his stomach when he had gone to the house of the petitioner seeking his wages. It is also submitted that the order impugned also records that even the doctors have opined that the injury has been caused by sharp edged weapon and the investigation of the case is in its nascent stages.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. The anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T