Patna High Court
Sandip MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The High Court set aside the order refusing anticipatory bail and granted anticipatory bail to Sandip Mahto, Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto, subject to conditions, while refusing bail to Mantu Mahto.
Summary
The appellants, four members of the Mahto family, were charged under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for alleged assault, caste-based abuse and theft of Rs.2,700. The informant claimed that Mantu Mahto assaulted him and that Sri Bhagwan Mahto spat on him and used a caste slur, while Sandip Mahto was accused of taking money. The trial court denied anticipatory bail to all accused. On appeal, the High Court observed that the specific allegations of caste abuse and assault were directed only at Mantu Mahto and Sri Bhagwan Mahto, who were not before the court, and that no case was made against Sandip, Lavkush and Kokil Mahto. Consequently, the court set aside the lower court’s order and granted anticipatory bail to Sandip, Lavkush and Kokil Mahto subject to detailed conditions, while maintaining the denial of bail for Mantu Mahto.
Issues considered
- The appropriateness of denying anticipatory bail to the appellants in light of the specific allegations against only some co‑accused.
- Whether the lower court erred in treating the allegations against Sandip, Lavkush and Kokil Mahto as sufficient grounds to refuse bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(va)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- caste abuse
- SC/ST Act
- assault
- theft
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.3481 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-23 Year-2025 Thana- Maghopur District- Gopalganj
======================================================
1. Sandip Mahto S/o Ramashankar Mahto R/o Village- Belsand, P.S-
Madhopur, District- Gopalganj
2. Mantu Mahto S/o Sri Kokil Mahto R/o Village- Belsand, P.S- Madhopur,
District- Gopalganj
3. Lavkush Mahto S/o Sri Bhagwan Mahto R/o Village- Belsand, P.S-
Madhopur, District- Gopalganj
4. Kokil Mahto@Rajkokil Mahto S/o Late Raghunath Mahto R/o Village-
Belsand, P.S- Madhopur, District- Gopalganj
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Om Prakash Kumar S/o Pradosh Manjhi R/o vill - Belsand, P.S.- Madhopur,
Distt.- Gopalganj
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sachina, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, Spl. PP
For the Informant : Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary, Advocate
: Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
4 23-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sachina, learned counsel for the
appellants and Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, learned counsel for the
informant beside learned Spl. PP representing the State.
2. This appeal has been filed for setting aside the
order dated 03.07.2025 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-11-cum Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gopalganj in
connection with Madhopur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025 registered
for the offence punishable under sections 351(2), 352, 126(2),
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3481 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
2/5
115(2), 303(2), 109 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and
section 3(1)(r)(s) and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST (P.O.A.) Act,
whereby the prayer for anticipatory bail of the appellants have
been rejected.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that while he was going to the market and reached near the
house of Kokil Mahto, the named accused persons came armed
variously and started assaulting. In the process, the allegation is
that Mantu Mahto assaulted the informant on the head causing
injury while Sri Bhagwan Mahto not only spitted on him, also
took caste name. Against appellant no.1, Sandip Mahto, the
allegation is of taking away Rs.2,700/-. He was taken to the
Primary Health Centre, Barauli which followed the F.I.R..
4. Learned counsel for the appellants submit that a
perusal of the F.I.R. would show that no allegation is against
appellant no.3 and 4 while though allegation of assault is on
Mantu Mahto, it has been found to be simple in nature.
5. Learned counsel for the informant on the other
hand opposes the prayer submitting that there is specific
allegation is against Mantu Mahto and Sri Bhagwan Mahto
though allegation of taking away of amount is also on Sandip
Mahto.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3481 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
3/5
6. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
the materials on record and fact that the specific allegation of
caste abuse has been attributed to Sri Bhagwan Mahto and he is
not before this Court, allegation of assault is on Mantu Mahto,
appellant no.2, his prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.
7. So far as the appellant nos. 1, 3 and 4 namely
Sandip Mahto, Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto @Rajkokil
Mahto respectively are concerned, taking into account the
aforesaid facts as also the allegation of caste abuse and/or
assault theory is not on them and it is submitted that the
cognizance has not been taken in the matter, some of the co-
accused namely Saroj Mahto and Hira Mahto have been
extended relief in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 3442 of 2025, in that
background, this Court is inclined to extend them the privilege
of anticipatory bail.
8. The impugned order dated 03.07.2025 passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-11-cum Special Judge,
SC/ST Act, Gopalganj in connection with Madhopur P.S. Case
No. 23 of 2025 stands set aside and the appeal is allowed in
respect of appellant nos. 1, 3 and 4 namely Sandip Mahto,
Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto @Rajkokil Mahto.
9. Let the appellant nos. 1, 3 and 4 namely Sandip
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3481 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
4/5
Mahto, Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto @Rajkokil Mahto, in
the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from
the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be
enlarged 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 the learned Additional Sessions Judge-11-cum
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Gopalganj in connection with
Madhopur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2025.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the appellant nos. 1, 3 and 4 namely Sandip
Mahto, Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto @Rajkokil Mahto
who shall provide official document (Aadhar Card/Voter
Id/Driving License/Pan Card) to show his/her bona fide;
(ii) the appellant no. 1, 3 and 4 namely Sandip Mahto,
Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto @Rajkokil Mahto shall be
appearing before the Police Station as and when required for
cooperating in the investigation;
(iii) the appellant no. 1, 3 and 4 namely Sandip
Mahto, Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto @Rajkokil Mahto
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/her bail bond by the Trial
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3481 of 2025(4) dt.23-02-2026
5/5
Court itself;
(iv) the appellant no. 1, 3 and 4 namely Sandip
Mahto, Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto @Rajkokil Mahto
shall appear before the concerned police station every month for
next six months to mark his attendance and at the end of the
period a certificate be submitted before the Trial Court failing
which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation
of bail bonds;
(v) the appellant no. 1, 3 and 4 namely Sandip Mahto,
Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto @Rajkokil Mahto 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 bonds;
(vi) the appellant no. 1, 3 and 4 namely Sandip
Mahto, Lavkush Mahto and Kokil Mahto @Rajkokil Mahto
shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing
which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation
of bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
vinayak/-
U T
Checking your session…