Patna High Court

Rajeshwar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 15 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH

Holding

The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, finding the delay in FIR filing and the existence of a land‑dispute‑related case and counter‑case sufficient to justify bail under Section 482(2).

Summary

The petitioners, Rajeshwar Mahto and Vijay Mahto, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case registered under multiple sections of the B.N.S. for alleged assault, abuse of an informant, and looting of Rs.10,000. The prosecution alleged that the petitioners participated in the assault and robbery, while the petitioners contended that the incident stemmed from an admitted land dispute, resulting only in a simple fight with injuries on both sides. They highlighted a 23‑day delay in filing the FIR without satisfactory explanation, casting doubt on the prosecution's case. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor opposed the bail, but the court, considering the case‑and‑counter‑case scenario and the FIR delay, granted anticipatory bail. The order directed that, if arrested within eight weeks, the petitioners be released on a bail bond of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Section 482(2) in view of the alleged offences and the delay in lodging the FIR
Whether the delay of 23 days in filing the FIR raises sufficient doubt to merit bail

Legislation cited

B.N.S. — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 127(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 76
B.N.S.S. — s. 482(2)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
Section 482
FIR delay
land dispute
assault
robbery
bail bond
Criminal Procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22018 of 2026

                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2025 Thana- KALYANPUR District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
           1.    Rajeshwar Mahto Son of Bhabhikshan Mahto @ Bhabhiksham Mahto
                 Resident of Village - Siswasob, P.S. - Kalyanpur, District - East Champaran.
           2.    Vijay Mahto Son of Parichhan Mahto Resident of Village - Siswasob, P.S. -
                 Kalyanpur, District - East Champaran.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioners     :       Mr. Madhurendra Kumar, Advocate
                 For the State           :       Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.

                                2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case

                   registered for the offence punishable under Sections 109,

                   127(2), 115(2), 118(1), 76, 303(2), 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the

                   B.N.S..

                                3. As per prosecution case, it is alleged that all the

                   F.I.R. named accused persons, including these petitioners,

                   abused and assaulted informant and his family members and

                   also looted Rs. 10,000/- cash from house of informant.

                                4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22018 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                            2/3




          behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and

          have committed no offence. As a matter of fact, on account of

          admitted land dispute between the parties, a simple maar-peet

          took place in which both sides sustained injuries. There is case

          and counter-case. Moreover, the present F.I.R. has been lodged

          after inordinate delay of 23 days and there is no plausible

          explanation for the same, which itself makes the entire

          prosecution case doubtful.

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

          opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the

          petitioners.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          case, case and counter-case between the parties and delay in

          lodging of the F.I.R., the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to

          the petitioners is allowed.

                       7. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within

          a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named

          petitioners 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 learned Additional Chief

          Judicial     Magistrate-12th,        East     Champaran,   Motihari   in

          connection with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 181 of 2025, subject
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22018 of 2026(2) dt.15-04-2026
                                                         3/3




                       to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..



                                             (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
shashank/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…