Chulbul Pandey @ Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13701 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-507 Year-2024 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya ====================================================== Chulbul Pandey @ Manish Kumar Son of Ramji Das @ Ramji Jha @ Ramjit Das Resident of Village- Bhadeja, P.S.- Mufassil, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Priya Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 12-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 507 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 387, 307, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that petitioner along with co-accused Shrawan Choudhary made threatening calls to the informant and demanded ransom. On the alleged date of occurrence, 30-40 accused persons including the petitioner came at the informant's house and made indiscriminate firing.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13701 of 2026(2) dt.12-03-2026 2/2 omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. He further submitted that there is no injury on the informant or any family member of the informant despite being the allegation that there was indiscriminate firing on the house of the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that other coaccused has been granted regular bail by this Bench vide order dated 20.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 8934 of 2025. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has five criminal antecedents.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. He further submitted that petitioner and other co-accused have made threatening calls to the informant and demanded ransom.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as criminal antecedent of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

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