Mantu Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29335 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-908 Year-2024 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Mantu Ray S/o Guljar Ray R/o Village- Dighi Kala East, P.S.- Sadar Hajipur, Dist.- Vaishali, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Keshab Raj For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Md. Fahimuddin ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2026
1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Hajipur Sadar Police Station Case No. 908 of 2024, disclosing offences under Sections 316(2), 108, 352, 351(2), 351(3), 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.
3. The prosecution case is based on a written application filed by the informant, Shivchandra Rai, alleging that about three months prior to the occurrence, accused persons Sahdev Rai, Paramjeet Rai, Surendra Rai, and Ranjan Kumar, by exerting influence and inducement, got approximately 12 Kattha of land belonging to the informant's mother, Gaya Devi, registered in the names of their wives by paying only part of the agreed consideration amount. The land was valued at about Rs.
2/4 2,57,50,000/-, out of which Rs. 1,38,00,000/- was allegedly paid, while the remaining Rs. 1,19,50,000/- remained unpaid. It is alleged that upon demand of the remaining amount, the aforesaid accused persons along with Mantu Rai (petitioner) threatened the informant and his family with dire consequences. Due to such threats and fear regarding non-payment of money and danger to his life, the informant's son, Gulshan Kumar, remained under mental stress and had allegedly expressed his apprehensions through phone calls and social media posts. It is further alleged that continuous threats by the accused persons drove Gulshan Kumar into fear and shock, as a result of which he committed suicide by hanging himself.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case due to suspicion, village politics, and family dispute. The FIR alleges that after execution of a gift deed by the informant's mother in favour of the informant's wife, the accused persons allegedly threatened the informant's son, who subsequently committed suicide by hanging himself. It is next submitted that no specific allegation or overt act has been attributed against the petitioner and that he has been implicated merely on account of his relationship with co-accused Sahdeo Rai, being his nephew.
3/4 The petitioner is neither a beneficiary of the alleged land transaction nor connected with the execution of the gift deed. According to the petitioner, the occurrence arose out of an internal family dispute relating to the said gift deed. It is also submitted that co-accused persons, namely Sahdeo Rai, Surendra Rai, Ranjan Kumar, and Paramjeet Rai, have already been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19285 of 2025. The petitioner further submits that he is a transporter by profession and, due to local enmity and business rivalry, has been falsely implicated in several cases.
5. Having regard to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that similarly situated co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. This application is, accordingly, allowed.
7. Let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
4/4 Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Hajipur Sadar Police Station Case No. 908 of 2024, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) HarshPandey/- U T