Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sanju Mahto @ Sanjay MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, Sanju Mahto.

Summary

Sanju Mahto was arrested in connection with a case registered on 28‑09‑2025 under multiple sections of the B.N.S, later amended to include Section 103(1). He contended that he was falsely implicated due to a family property dispute and that the injuries to the victims were superficial. The petitioner highlighted that a co‑accused, Rahul Mahto, had already been granted regular bail and that he had no prior criminal record, having been in custody since 03‑01‑2026. The State opposed the bail application. After hearing both sides, the Court, noting the lack of serious injury, the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the parity with the co‑accused, ordered that he be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bail‑bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties of equal amount. The application for bail was therefore allowed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the serious nature of the offences charged under the B.N.S.
  • Whether the petitioner’s alleged false implication and lack of prior criminal record justify bail.

Legislation cited

  • B.N.S. — s. 103, 109, 115, 126, 3, 303, 351, 352, 76

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • false implication
  • property dispute
  • criminal antecedent
  • B.N.S
  • high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17657 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2025 Thana- BUNIYAD GANJ District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Sanju Mahto @ Sanjay Mahto Son of Mohan Mahto R/o Village - Dudhaila,
                 P.S.- Buniyadganj, District - Gaya.

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Pushpa Sinha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   06-05-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Buniyadganj P.S. Case

                   No. 296 of 2025 dated 28.09.2025 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 76, 303(2),

                   351(2), 352 and 3(5) of B.N.S and later on Section 103(1) of

                   B.N.S. was added.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, eleven named accused

                   persons are alleged to have collectively assaulted the informant

                   and other family members.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17657 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
                                            2/3




          petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case with

          allegations of general and omnibus nature. It has been submitted

          that petitioner has been named only because he happens to be

          one of the family members and on account of some dispute with

          regard to property, the present false and concocted case has been

          lodged. It has further been submitted that from perusal of the

          injury reports, it would be evident that the two persons who

          were found to be injured had sustained simple injuries which are

          superficial in nature. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

          submitted that similarly situated co-accused, Rahul Mahto has

          been granted regular bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court

          vide order dated 11.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 91228 of

          2025. It has lastly been submitted that petitioner has got no

          criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 03.01.2026.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

                       6. Heard the parties and perused the records.

                       7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case

          and also the parity, the petitioner above-named is directed to be

          enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

          Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the

          satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Gaya in connection
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17657 of 2026(3) dt.06-05-2026
                                                       3/3




                     with Buniyadganj P.S. Case No. 296 of 2025.

                                  8. The application stands allowed.



                                                (Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.