Patna High Court
Santosh Mahto @ Santosh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner with specified conditions.
Summary
Santosh Mahto was arrested in connection with a robbery alleged under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code, based on a complaint lodged on 7 January 2023. He has been in custody since 27 March 2025 and argues that his continued detention is unjustified, especially since a co‑accused was granted bail in a related case. The State opposed bail, citing the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. The court, after considering the petitioner’s undertaking to appear regularly and the circumstances of the co‑accused’s relief, decided to grant bail subject to stringent conditions, including a cash bond, sureties, regular appearances before the trial court and police station, and prohibitions against tampering with evidence or committing further offences. The bail order was issued by Justice Rajiv Roy of the Patna High Court.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused of robbery under IPC Section 392 despite a criminal antecedent.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 392
Subjects
- bail
- robbery
- IPC 392
- criminal antecedent
- court conditions
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20533 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2023 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran
======================================================
Santosh Mahto @ Santosh Kumar Son of Ratan Mahto @ Ram Ratan Mahto
@ Ram Ratan Mahato Resident of Village - Sisawa Ajagari, P.S. - Banjariya,
Dist. - East Chamaparan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
2 03-04-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with
Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 27 of 2023 for the offence punishable
under Sections 392 of the Indian Penal Code, lodged on
07.01.2023 by the informant Vicky Kumar Singh.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that while moving near Arya Samaj Chowk, the accused
intercepted and snatched his bag containing huge amount beside
mobile. This led to the F.I.R.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he
has already suffered by being in custody since 27.03.2025 only
because he has criminal antecedent. Further submissions is that
co-accused Jikurullah Ansari has been granted relief in Cr. Misc.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20533 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
No. 80378 of 2023 (Annexure-3 to the petition) by a coordinate
bench.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that he
has criminal antecedent.
6. Considering the submissions of the parties
aforesaid as also the undertaking given by the petitioner that he
shall be diligently appearing in trial, in that background, this
Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of bail with
conditions.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing
bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of
like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, East Champaran, Motihari, in connection with
Turkauliya P.S. Case No. 27 of 2023 subject to the following
conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family
member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official
document (Aadhar Card/Driving License/Voter ID/Pan Card
etc.) to show his bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20533 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned
police station every fortnight 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;
(iv) the petitioner 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;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Ravi/-
U T
Checking your session…