Manish Kumar Singh @ Manish Kumar @ Manish Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28883 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-56 Year-2025 Thana- MANJHAGARH District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Manish Kumar Singh @ Manish Kumar @ Manish Singh S/O Pasuram Singh @ Parsuram Singh Resident of village- Kolhuan PS- Majhagarh Dist.- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Subhash Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Mohammed Arif, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 08-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Manjhagarh P.S. Case No. 56 of 2025 instituted for the offence under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109(1), 303(2), 352 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

On 15.02.2025 at around 7:00 a.m., the informant was attacked during his morning walk by Parshuram Singh with a sword and by Manish Singh (petitioner) with a farsa, causing serious injuries. The accused also allegedly looted a gold chain worth Rs. 70,000/- and Rs.4,000/- to Rs. 5,000/- in cash from him.

4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28883 of 2025(2) dt.08-05-2025 2/3 that the petitioner is in custody since 24-03-2025. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent, as per disclosure made in paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.

5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit that parties are agnates. It is next argued that the injury Nos. 2 & 3 are opined to be simple in nature by the doctor, whereas injury No.1 is grievous in nature caused by hard and blunt substance. Learned counsel for the petitioner next contends that the allegation against of petitioner of giving farsa blow, but the doctor has not found the injury caused by sharp cutting weapon, which falsifies the prosecution case.

6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. There is direct allegation upon the petitioner, hence, he does not deserve the privilege of bail.

7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, there being direct allegation of assault against the petitioner and the injury being found to be grievous in nature, this Court, at this stage, is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28883 of 2025(2) dt.08-05-2025 3/3 accordingly, rejected.

8.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T