Patna High Court
Akildeo Mahto @ Akil MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to Akildeo Mahto subject to the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioners Akildeo Mahto and Anand Kumar were implicated in a case (Kesariya P.S. Case No. 397 of 2024) for offences under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, including assault and robbery. Only Akildeo Mahto’s anticipatory bail application was pressed before the Patna High Court; Anand Kumar’s was dismissed as not pressed. The petitioner argued that the allegations were uncorroborated, the injury report did not support the charge of ordering the assault, and he had a clean antecedent. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail to Akildeo Mahto subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and ordered the bond and surety requirements. The order was made without prejudice to the trial, and the application was disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to Akildeo Mahto under Section 438 CrPC in view of the allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the prosecution’s evidence is sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent warrants bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false implication
- criminal antecedent
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438
- Section 482
- assault
- theft
- East Champaran
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68958 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-397 Year-2024 Thana- KESARIA District- East Champaran
======================================================
1. Akildeo Mahto @ Akil Mahto, S/o Amika Mahto;
2. Anand Kumar, S/o Kapildeo Mahto;
Both are resident of Village- Lohargawa, P.S.- Kesariya, Distt.- East
Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pravin Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
4 21-01-2026 The learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very
outset, submits that he shall not be pressing the application of
petitioner No. 2, namely, Anand Kumar.
2. Accordingly, the application with respect to
petitioner No. 2 stands dismissed as not pressed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner No. 1
and the learned A.P.P. for the State.
4. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68958 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
connection with Kesariya P.S. Case No. 397 of 2024 registered
for the offence(s) under Section(s) 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109,
352, 351(2), 303(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 (B.N.S.).
5. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that all the accused persons named in the F.I.R. along
with seven other unknown accused persons surrounded his son
and started abusing him. It is alleged that on the orders of the
petitioner, the other co-accused assaulted the son of the
informant. It is further alleged that one Amika Mahto gave
farsa blow on the head of the informant, causing head injury
while the other accused/Anand Kumar assaulted the son of the
informant by means of iron rod, which also caused head injury
to him and he fell unconscious. It is also alleged that the
accused persons took away the gold chain and bracelets.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and a
superficial allegation of giving orders has been leveled against
him. It has been submitted that the allegations as made in the
F.I.R. is not corroborated by the injury report, which finds
mentioned in the case diary in paragraph 58, wherein three
injuries were found ; two injuries were on the head, whereas one
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68958 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
was on the upper lip of the son of the informant. It has further
been submitted that after the examination and the radio-logical
report, the injuries were found to be simple in nature and
moreover, there is no allegation of assault upon the petitioner.
It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has clean
antecedent.
7. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let
the petitioner No. 1, namely, Akildeo Mahto @ Akil Mahto, be
released on anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or
surrender before the concerned Court/successor Court within a
period of four weeks from today, on his furnishing bail bond in
the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
concerned Court/successor Court where the case is pending in
connection with Kesariya P.S. Case No. 397 of 2024, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with corresponding Section
482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68958 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
(B.N.S.S.) as well as subject to the following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his
close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the concerned
Court.
(iv) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
antecedent of the petitioner and in case, at any stage, it is
found that he has concealed his criminal antecedent, the
Court concerned shall take necessary steps for cancellation
of his bail bond. However, the acceptance of bail bond in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed
for purpose of or in the name of verification.
9. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
10. The application stands disposed off accordingly.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…