KISHUN MAHATO ALIAS K. MAHATO v. STATE OF JHARKHAND
B.A./9482/2025 · 2025-11-25
Ambuj Nath
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34757 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34757 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
( 2025:JHHC:35097 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B. A. No. 9482 of 2025
Kishun Mahato @ K. Mahato, aged about 29 years, son of Ranju Mahato, resident of Village- Jamuniyatand, P.O.- Ramnagargarh, P.S.- Mahuda, District- Dhanbad.
…. Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand
…. Opp. Party
------ CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Nisith Kumar Sahani, Advocate
Mr. Randhir Kumar Vishwakarma, Adv. For the Opp. Party : Ms. Lily Sahay, A.P.P.
----- 3/ 25.11.2025 Heard the parties.
2.
Petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mahuda P.S. Case No. 124 of 2025 for the offence registered under Section 310(2) of the B.N.S., 2023, pending in the Court of Ms. Saquia Kausar, learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dhanbad.
3.
On 18.08.2025 at about 8.00 pm, the petitioner and co-accused persons intercepted the truck of the informant and looted Rs. 20,000/- and jewelleries from him. The petitioner is named in the FIR.
4.
It was submitted that the informant had attempted to commit rape upon the wife of accused no.1 and when the villagers protested, this case has been instituted. Attention has been drawn towards the copy of the complaint petition, which has been filed by way of supplementary affidavit. It appears that this complaint was filed on 12.09.2025, stating the date of occurrence to be 18.08.2025, i.e. on the date when the present case was instituted.
5.
It is apparent that the complaint case is an afterthought.
6.
In view of the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected.
(Ambuj Nath, J.) R.Kr. 25.11.2025