Aklesh Kumar @ Akhilesh Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9377 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-245 Year-2025 Thana- DERNI BAZAR District- Saran ====================================================== Aklesh Kumar @ Akhilesh Manjhi S/o Sukhal Manjhi @ Sapyan Manjhi R/o Village- Magaidih, Police station- Chapra Muffsil, District- Saran Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2026 Heard Mr. Brij Kishor Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Binod Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 22.10.2025 in connection with Derni P.S. Case No. 245 of 2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2) and 3(5) of BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that one Dilip Manjhi got his fardbeyan recorded before the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, namely, Hare Ram Singh of T.O.P. P.M.C.H., Patna on 21.10.2025 at 11:15 hours for the occurrence alleged to be taken place on 20.10.2025 at 22:00 hours, who made accused to (1) Ranjeet Kumar and (2) Aklesh Kumar, on the basis of which Derni Police Station Case No.245 of 2025
2/4 was registered on 21.10.2025 under sections-103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the "B.N.S." and section 27 of the Arms Act. The informant in his fardbeyan stated that his younger bother Munchun Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar was doing the work of labourer who, who on 20.10.2025 at 10:00 p.m. had proceeded with his friend Ranjeet Kumar and Aklesh Kumar to Derni Devi Sthan situated in village Pojhi and started distributing the earn remuneration and in that course all the three made quarrel with each other and during that course Aklesh Kumar picked up Pistol from his waist which Ranjeet Kumar son of Bhageran Rai picked up and then fired with that pistol on Munchun Kumar @ Ranjeet Kumar on his temple. On getting information about the said occurrence the informant came there and then he learnt that Ranjeet Kumar had taken away his brother for treatment at Parsa Government Hospital from where he was sent to P.M.C.H. Patna, who died at P.M.C.H. Patna during treatment on 21.10.2025.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is forged and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. It is next submitted that from
3/4 perusal of the FIR it appears that the main assailant of the case is Ranjit Kumar. Apart from aforesaid, confessional statement of Ranjit Kumar was recorded before the police in which he has stated that he has fired upon the victim and the police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet and petitioner is in custody since 22.10.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner but fairly submits that Ranjit Kumar has fired upon the victim. Apart from that petitioner has antecedent of one case other than the present case but fairly submits that petitioner is on bail in the pending matter.
6. Considering the aforesaid 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 the learned Judicial Magistrate-First Class, Chapra, District-Saran in connection with Derni P.S. Case No. 245 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
4/4 on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Gaurav Sinha/- U T