Patna High Court
Pappu Mahto @ Pappu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners, subject to bond and surety conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, Pappu Mahto, Chandan Mahto and Dilip Mahto, were named in an FIR (Town P.S. Case No. 206 of 2026) for assaulting an informant and others, alleged to be punishable under several sections of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and section 27 of the Arms Act. They applied for anticipatory bail, contending that the incident was a mutual free fight, that injuries were simple and there was no intention to cause death. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences. The court examined the medical report, the nature of the injuries and the petitioners' criminal antecedents, noting that the assault did not appear to be a repeated or grievous act. Relying on Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, the court granted anticipatory bail subject to a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties. The order directed the petitioners to surrender within four weeks and comply with the bail conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners accused of assault under the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita and Arms Act.
- Whether the nature of the injuries and lack of intent to cause death negate the seriousness of the offences.
- Whether the petitioners' prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- simple injury
- Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
- Arms Act
- bail conditions
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36849 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-206 Year-2026 Thana- CHAPRA TOWN District- Saran
======================================================
1. Pappu Mahto @ Pappu Kumar Son of Shyam Babu Mahto @ Shyam Babu
Resident of Village- Sahebganj, Sonarpatti, P.S.- Town, District- Saran
2. Chandan Mahto @ Chandan Kumar Son of Shatrudhan Mahto @ Satrohan
Mahto Resident of Village- Sahebganj, Sonarpatti, P.S.- Town, District-
Saran
3. Dilip Mahto Son of Late Lal Babu Mahto Resident of Village- Rupganj,
P.S.- Town, District- Saran
... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Adarsh Ranjan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The accused-petitioners, named in the F.I.R., are
apprehending their arrest in connection with Town P.S. Case No.
206 of 2026 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 352, 351(2) & 3(5)
of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (in short, the ‘B.N.S.’) and
section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The allegation against the petitioner is to assault the
informant and others alongwith seven co-accused persons
causing head and bodily injury, where the occurrence alleged to
be arising out of previous enmity.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36849 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners
submitted that the occurrence was free fight in nature where
both parties received injury and, therefore, it can be safely said
that petitioners were not under intention to cause death of the
injured.
5. It is pointed out that for same set of occurrence
petitioners had also lodged a case against the informant which
was registered as Saran Town P.S. Case No. 205 of 2026 lodged
by petitioner no. 1. It is further argued that upon medical
examination, the injury was found single and simple in nature.
6. Explaining criminal antecedent of the petitioners, it is
submitted that petitioner no. 1 found involved in three criminal
cases, petitioner no. 2 found involved in six criminal cases and
petitioner no. 3 found involved in 11 criminal cases, all are of
petty nature, in which petitioners are on bail.
7. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
8. In view of the aforesaid factual submissions and by
taking note of the fact as the allegation qua physical assault
prima facie not appears repeated, where injury upon medical
examination found simple in nature, accordingly, all above-
named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36849 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/3
period of four weeks from this order, are directed to be enlarged
on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand
only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at
Chapra/concerned court in connection with Town P.S. Case No.
206 of 2026, subject to the conditions as laid down under
Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C/Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)
Rajeev/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.