Haricharan Mahto v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1653 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-336 Year-2025 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Haricharan Mahto Son of Late Jairam Mahto Resident of Village -Sabalpur Chaitola PS -Sonepur Distt- Saran 2.

Ashok Mahto @ Ashok Kumar son of Haricharan Mahto Resident of Village -Sabalpur Chaitola PS -Sonepur Distt- Saran 3.

Sunil Mahto @ Sunil Kumar son of Haricharan Mahto Resident of Village -Sabalpur Chaitola PS -Sonepur Distt- Saran 4.

Deepak Kumar son of Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Mahto Resident of Village -Sabalpur Chaitola PS -Sonepur Distt- Saran 5.

Lalpari Devi Wife of Haricharan Mahto Resident of Village -Sabalpur Chaitola PS -Sonepur Distt- Saran 6.

Munni Devi @ Munu Devi @ Manni Devi wife of Ashok Mahto Resident of Village -Sabalpur Chaitola PS -Sonepur Distt- Saran 7.

Geeta Devi Wife of Sunil Kumar @ Sunil Mahto Resident of Village -Sabalpur Chaitola PS -Sonepur Distt- Saran 8.

Rubi Devi Wife of Ranglal Kumar Resident of Village -Sabalpur Chaitola PS -Sonepur Distt- Saran 9.

Kameshwar Mahto son of Vasudeo Mahto Resident of Village -Sabalpur Chaitola PS -Sonepur Distt- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raghwendra Pratap Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 30-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 336 of 2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 118(2), 303(2), 352, 351(2),351(3)/3(5) of the BNS.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1653 of 2026(2) dt.30-01-2026 2/2

3. It is alleged that the petitioners along with other coaccused persons, assaulted the informant with lathi, sword, iron rod and pistol, as a result of which, the informant sustained head injuries.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He has further submitted that both the parties are agnates and there is land dispute between them. The learned trial court has mentioned in its order that no injury report is annexed with the record.

5. On the other hand, the learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the above-mentioned facts and circumstances, let the petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender within four weeks before the learned court below, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Saran at Chapra/Concerned Court in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 336 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) Nirmal/- U T