Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 38103 (PAT)

Subhash Mahto @ Virappan Mahto @ Veerappaan Mahto v. The State of Bihar

CR. MISC./64496/2025 · 2026-01-21

Nawneet Kumar Pandey

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.64496 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-247 Year-2024 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== Subhash Mahto @ Virappan Mahto @ Veerappaan Mahto S/O Saudagar Mahto R/O Vill.- Kakan, P.S.- Jamui, District- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Satya Prakash Parasar For the State : Mr. J.N.Thakur, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 4 21-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. This is an application for regular bail on behalf of the petitioner for the offences alleged under Sections 386 and 387/34 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Jamui P.S.Case No. 247/2024. 3. As per allegation, while the informant was engaged in his work, some unidentified persons riding on motor-cycles came at the scene and without any provocation, hit him with hard and blunt substance, causing him injury. The miscreants also robbed the co-workers of the informant of Rs. 20,000/- and also demand more to satiate their desires. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.64496 of 2025(4) dt.21-01-2026 2/2 implicated. One of the victim namely Abhimanyu Kumar, who is the signatory of the fardbayan, did not disclose the name of the petitioner while jotting down the fardbayan, but subsequently in his re-statement, he named the petitioner, stating hat the criminals were calling the petitioner as Verappan and except that there is nothing against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custdoy since 20.05.2025 and in all the cases mentioned in para-3 of the bail petition, the petitioner is on bail. 5. On the other hand, Mr. J.N.Thakur, the learned APP for the State, has opposed the prayer for bail. 6. Considering the above facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above-named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Jamui in connection with Jamui P.S.Case No. 247/2024, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall cooperate in the disposal of trial and make himself available as and when required by the court. HR/- (Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) U T