Patna High Court
Bijal MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that, given the petitioner’s clean antecedent and lack of direct involvement, anticipatory bail should be granted subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Summary
The petitioner, Bijal Mahto, applied for anticipatory bail anticipating arrest in a case involving multiple offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. He argued that he has a clean antecedent, was falsely implicated by an informant, and is the father of one of the accused, Roshan. The prosecution opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the alleged offences. The court examined the allegations, noted the petitioner’s clean record, and considered that he is unlikely to abscond. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bail‑bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. The application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the petitioner is likely to abscond or tamper with evidence
- Whether the allegations in the FIR sufficiently implicate the petitioner personally
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 127(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 482(2), 74
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- clean antecedent
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19480 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-53 Year-2025 Thana- BIBHUTIPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Bijal Mahto Son of Late Vansi Mahto @ Banshi Mahto Resident of Village-
Mohanpur, P.S.- Bibhutipur, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pratik
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Anurag Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-05-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 74, 109, 303(2), 352,
351(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that Roshan was apprehended in a case of liquor and is
in custody, further on 03.02.2025, 10 named accused persons
including the petitioner along with 5-7 unknown accused
intercepted the informant near the house of Yadunandan at 07:30
PM and Sanjit along with petitioner gave orders to kill, on the
pretext that because of the informant, Roshan was sent to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19480 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
2/3
judicial custody, thereafter Amit assaulted the informant by an
iron rod causing injury on head, thereafter Amarjit assaulted
Avinash by rod causing injury on head and Sumit assaulted Ram
Pukar, a differently abled person, by rod causing injury on head
and thereafter all accused assaulted Ram Pukar and Satya Devi
along with Sumitra snatched her earring and chain.
4. The 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
allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that no
specific allegation of assault is alleged, rather the informant
alleges that on orders of petitioner and Sanjit, the occurrence
was committed by the named accused persons. It is next
submitted that petitioner is father of Roshan, as such, he came to
be implicated. It is also submitted that if privilege of
anticipatory bail is granted, petitioner will not abscond rather
will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the
anticipatory bail application of the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and also taking
into consideration the fact that petitioner is a person with clean
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19480 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
3/3
antecedent the petitioner, above-named, in the event of his arrest
or surrender within a period of six weeks, is directed to be
released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Rosera, Samastipur in connection with
Bibhutipur P. S. Case No. 53 of 2025, subject to the conditions
laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-
U T
Checking your session…