Manikat Kumar @ Mani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22495 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-316 Year-2025 Thana- JAKKANPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Manikat Kumar @ Mani, Son of Late Sursh Kumar Singh @ Suresh Kumar Singh, R/o Village - Tangaul, P.S - Nagar, District - Vaishali, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ashish Kumar Ranjan, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Uday Chand Prasad, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Radha Mohan Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 15-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jakkanpur P.S. Case No. 316 of 2025, registered for the alleged offences under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of BNS and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per prosecution case, the brother-in-law of the informant was shot dead and the name of the petitioner transpired during investigation for being involved in the murder of the brother-in-law of the informant.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner has been named in this case merely on

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22495 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026 2/3 suspicion. No one has seen the petitioner going towards the place of occurrence or fleeing away from the place of occurrence. The confessional statement of co-accused Kundan Kumar was recorded and this petitioner has been falsely implicated and was forced to confess for killing the brother-inlaw of the informant. The petitioner has no concern with the other co-accused persons. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 05.05.2025 and charge sheet has been submitted. The petitioner is having antecedents of two cases and he is on bail in both the cases.

5. The learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently oppose the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the informant submits that at the instance of the petitioner, recovery of pistol used in the occurrence and four live cartridges were made from the cowshed of the petitioner, who confessed his involvement. The learned counsel further submits that the prayer for grant of bail of the co-accused Kundan Kumar has been rejected by the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.03.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No.5149 of 2026.

6. Having regard to the fact that recovery of murder weapon has been made at the instance of the petitioner, I am not

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22495 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026 3/3 inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

7. Accordingly, his prayer for grant of bail is rejected.

8. However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody for more than one year.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) V.K.Pandey/- U T