Sanni Kumar @ Sanni Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81994 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-164 Year-2025 Thana- SALIMPUR District- Patna ====================================================== 1.

SANNI KUMAR @ SANNI MAHTO Son of Ishwar Mahto @ Ram Ishwar Mahto Resident of Village - Rupas Maruahi, Bind Toli, P.S. - Salimpur, District - Patna 2.

RAJESH MAHTO @ RAJESH KUMAR Son of Nanak Mahto @ Nanhak Mahto Resident of Village - Rupas Maruahi, Bind Toli, P.S. - Salimpur, District - Patna 3.

MUKESH MAHTO @ MUKESH KUMAR Son of Surendra Mahto Resident of Village - Rupas Maruahi, Bind Toli, P.S. - Salimpur, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 13-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.

2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 74, 352, 351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 66(E) of the Information Technology Act.

3. As per prosecution case, these petitioners uploaded objectionable photographs of the daughter of informant on social media but the matter was settled, after intervention of village Panchayat. Again on 14.06.2025, petitioner no. 3

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81994 of 2025(5) dt.13-03-2026 2/3 uploaded objectionable photographs of the daughter of informant on social media and threatened informant with dire consequences.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that specific accusation is against petitioner no. 3 who is alleged to have uploaded objectionable photographs of the victim on social media. So far rest of the petitioners are concerned, they are only alleged to have assisted petitioner no.

3. There is no allegation of any specific overt act against them. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the bail application.

6. In view of the fact that petitioner No. 3 uploaded objectionable photographs of the daughter of informant on social media, prayer for anticipatory bail of petitioner No. 3 is refused.

7. However, considering the nature of accusation and clean antecedent against petitioner Nos. 1 & 2, the anticipatory bail with regard to petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 is allowed and it is ordered that the above named petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 in the event of their arrest/surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81994 of 2025(5) dt.13-03-2026 3/3 bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st, Barh, Patna in connection with Salimpur P. S. Case No. 164 of 2025, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T