Patna High Court
Dinesh Mahto @ Dinesh Kumar MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The court granted bail to petitioners No. 1 and 3 subject to bond, sureties and family‑member bailor conditions.
Summary
The petitioners Dinesh, Rajan and Nitish Mahto were charged under several provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for allegedly assaulting the informant's grandson with an edged weapon, snatching money and extorting shopkeepers on 5 September 2025. The FIR was lodged two days later, and a counter‑case (Pachrukhi P.S. Case No. 408 of 2025) raised questions about the identity of the assailants and the seriousness of the injury. The petitioners applied for pre‑arrest bail; the counsel for petitioner No. 2 withdrew his bail application, while counsel for petitioners No. 1 and 3 sought bail. The State opposed bail, citing the grievous injury and delay in filing the FIR. After hearing both sides, the court granted bail to petitioners No. 1 and 3 subject to a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and the condition that one bailor be a close family member, invoking Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail should be granted to petitioners No. 1 and 3 despite the seriousness of the alleged offences and the delay in lodging the FIR
- Whether the existence of a counter‑case and ambiguity about the assailant’s identity affect the bail decision
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 109, 115(2), 126(2), 127(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- assault
- extortion
- FIR delay
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91307 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-409 Year-2025 Thana- PANCHRUKHI District- Siwan
======================================================
1. Dinesh Mahto @ Dinesh Kumar Mahto S/O Swaminath Mahto Resident of
Village - Vishambharpur, P.S. - Pachrukhi, District - Siwan
2. Rajan Mahto @ Rajan Kumar Mahto@ Rajan Kumar S/O Dhyanchand
Mahto Resident of Village - Vishambharpur, P.S. - Pachrukhi, District -
Siwan
3. Nitish Mahto @ Nitish Kumar Mahto S/O Dhyanchand Mahto Resident of
Village - Vishambharpur, P.S. - Pachrukhi, District - Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bijay Prakash Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State as well as learned Advocate for the informant.
2. After some argument the learned Advocate for the
petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the bail application of
the petitioner no. 2.
3. Permission is accorded.
4. The petitioner nos. 1 and 3 are apprehending their
his arrest in connection with Pachrukhi P.S. Case No. 409 of
2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections
126(2), 115(2), 127(2), 303(2), 109, 351(2), 352 and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
5. Allegedly on the evening of 05.09.2025, while the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91307 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
grandson of the informant was returning from his shop, in the
meanwhile, the petitioners surrounded him and brutally
assaulted. It is specifically alleged that petitioner no. 2 assaulted
the informant’s grandson over his head by means of edged
weapon, due to which he sustained serious injury. It is further
alleged that petitioner no. 1 snatched rupees nineteen thousand
from the pocket of the informant’s grandson, whereas petitioner
no.3 alongwith others have assaulted him by means of lathi and
danda. There is further accusation of demand of extortion for
allowing the shopkeepers to run their shops.
6. Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submitted that the alleged occurrence took place on
05.09.2025, but the present FIR came to be instituted on
07.09.2025. Moreover, there is a counter version of the present
case bearing Pachrukhi P.S. Case No. 408 of 2025, which is on
earlier point of time. The injured was assaulted by co-accused
Nitish as well as Dinesh, besides the petitioner no. 2 and, as
such, it is very difficult to opine that whose injury has been
found to be grievous. Moreover, the petitioners are men of fair
antecedent and they undertake that they will fully cooperate in
the proceeding of the Court.
7. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
vehemently opposed the pre-arrest bail application and submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91307 of 2025(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
that the delay has occurred as the grandson of the informant had
sustained serious injury and he was taken to hospital for urgent
treatment. There is a specific accusation against the petitioners
is the contention of learned Advocate for the informant.
8. Having considered the submissions advanced by
learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of
the accusation levelled against petitioner nos. 1 and 3, besides
the factum of case and counter case and the delay in lodging of
the FIR, let the petitioner nos. 1 and 3 be released on bail, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a
period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a
copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned A.C.J.M.-IX, Siwan in connection
with Pachrukhi P.S. Case No. 409 of 2025, subject to the
conditions laid down in Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the further condition that one of
the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the
petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
supratim/-
U T
Checking your session…