Patna High Court
Ranjeet Mahto @ Ranjita MahatoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjeet Mahto, was named in an FIR for multiple offences including assault with a sword that allegedly caused grievous injury to Munga Devi. He applied for anticipatory bail, claiming a clean antecedent and that the allegations were fabricated. The prosecution highlighted the specific allegation of sword assault and the seriousness of the injury. The court examined the FIR, the injury report, and the fact that co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail. Considering the direct allegation against the petitioner and the grievous nature of the injury, the court declined to grant anticipatory bail. The petition for bail was therefore refused.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner in view of the specific allegation of assault with a sword and the grievous injury caused.
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- assault
- grievous injury
- false implication
- criminal procedure
- BNS 2023
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86671 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-295 Year-2025 Thana- DORIGANJ District- Saran
======================================================
Ranjeet Mahto @ Ranjita Mahato, Son of Prabhu Mahato Resident of Village
- Kazipur, P.S.- Doriganj, District - Saran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Mili Kumari, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-01-2026 Heard Ms. Mili Kumari, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Doriganj P.S. Case No. 295 of 2025, F.I.R.
dated 13.08.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections
126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2), 324 and 3(5) of the BNS,
2023.
3. According to prosecution case, all the accused
persons including this petitioner came at the door of the
informant and started abusing and assaulting him with daab due
to construction of first floor of the building. When the family
members of the informant namely Sani Kumar, Mantu Kumar
and Munga Devi came to rescue the informant, they were also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86671 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
assaulted by co-accused Haresh, Dipak, Akhilesh and Ranjit
(petitioner). Petitioner Ranjeet Mahto @ Ranjita Mahato
assaulted with sword on the head of Munga Devi causing
grievous injury and co-accused Ranjay and Rameshwar
assaulted Mantu.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
implicated in the present case. He further submits that the
allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated although
the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and there is specific
allegation that he assaulted one Munga Devi with sword. As per
prosecution case, the petitioner assaulted Munga Devi by means
of sword but the injury report does not support the allegation as
alleged in the F.I.R. There is case and counter case between the
parties. It is further submitted that co-accused persons namely
Ranjay Kumar, Deepak Mahto, Akhilesh Mahto and Prabhu
Mahto have been granted anticipatory bail by the learned court
below itself.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as
learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, have
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that from perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that specific
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86671 of 2025(2) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
allegation of assault by means of sword to Munga Devi is
against the petitioner. The injury report suggests that the injury
received by the person injured is grievous in nature.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case as well as there is direct and specif allegation of
assault against the petitioner and nature of injury is grievous, I
am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner in connection with Doriganj P.S. Case No. 295 of
2025 pending in the Court of learned A.C.J.M.-VIII, Chapra,
Saran.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
khushbu/-
U T
Checking your session…