Ganauri Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3507 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2024 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya ====================================================== Ganauri Manjhi S/O Kamlesh Manjhi R/O village - Jodhpur, P.S- Bodhgaya, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinod Kumar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 24-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bodhgaya P.S. Case No. 11 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-B)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, the police has recovered country-made pistol from the possession of the co-accused Gariban Manjhi.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case on the basis of suspicion. He further submits that nothing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3507 of 2025(2) dt.24-01-2025 2/3 incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of the confessional statement of the coaccused Anoj Manjhi before the police. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been stated in paragraph no.3 of the present anticipatory bail application. There is a non-compliance of Section 103 of the B.N.S.S. which creates a serious doubt in the prosecution case. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the co-accused Bablu Lal Manjhi and Sundar Manjhi have been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 09.05.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 35177 of 2024.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, stating that the offence alleged is serious in nature and, hence, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the gravity of the offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, above named, is rejected. If the petitioner surrenders before the court below within a period of four weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same would be considered by the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3507 of 2025(2) dt.24-01-2025 3/3 court below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) rishi/- U T