Manjit Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28227 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2025 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Manjit Kumar S/o Chhathu Pandit Resident of Village- Pokharaira, P.S.- Panapur Kariyat, District- Muzaffarpur, ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhavesh Kumar, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Anish Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 20-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 309(5)of the BNSS and section 393 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation in the FIR, is that while the informant was going home, he was surrounded by four or five persons, who tried to snatch his mobile and key of motorcycle but the informant, any how, got rid of the clutches and fled away leaving his motorcycle in the orchard. It is further alleged that after seeing the police, the informant narrated the said story to the police and on chase four persons apprehended by the police and the petitioner being one of them.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would be evident from a bare reading of the FIR itself, that an attempt had been made to snatch away the motorcycle of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28227 of 2025(3) dt.20-06-2025 2/2 informant however, the accused persons did not succeed in the same. Further, argued that even during the course of investigation, no substantial material has been collected to connect the petitioner in the present offence. No other independent witness has been examined in support of the allegation made by the informant. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 27.02.2025. It has also been pointed out that the petitioner was earlier granted the privilege of provisional bail for the purpose of marriage whereafter, he surrendered on time and did not misuse the privilege of bail in the said period. Further, the recovery being shown in the seizure list belongs to the petitioner himself.

7. Taking into consideration the above mentioned facts and circumstances and also considering that the charge sheet has been submitted, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs 10,000/- (ten thousand)with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/ successor court in Kanti P.S.Case No. 89 of 2025. (Soni Shrivastava, J) N.K/- U T