Manish Pandey @ Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41352 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-40 Year-2026 Thana- DOBHI District- Gaya ====================================================== 1.
Manish Pandey @ Manish Kumar S/O Arvind Pandey R/O Vill.- Sadipur, P.O- Saunghi, P.S- Buniyadganj, Dist - Gaya 2.
Sonu Tiwari @ Sonu Kumar S/O Mohan Tiwari R/O Vill.- Sadipur, P.OSaunghi, P.S- Buniyadganj, Dist - Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Md. Javed Jafar Khan, Advocate For the State :
Ms. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-07-2026 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners and learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 303(2) and 317(2) of the B.N.S..
3. As per prosecution case, when the informant was going from Begusarai to Chatra on truck, co-accused Ravi Kishan asked to stop the truck to have some breakfast and in the meantime, Petitioner No. 1, namely Manish Pandey, stole Rs. 40,000/- cash from the vehicle.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners that petitioners are quite innocent and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41352 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026 2/3 have committed no offence. Petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case merely on suspicion. Not a single farthing of the alleged stolen money was recovered from possession of these petitioners. It is further submitted that there is absolutely no allegation of theft or any other overt act against Petitioner No. 2. Petitioners claim clean antecedents.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and submitted that Petitioner No. 1 is named in the F.I.R. and there is specific accusation that he stole Rs. 40,000/- from the vehicle while the informant had gone to have breakfast.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and specific and direct nature of accusation, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 1 is rejected.
7. So far as Petitioner No. 2 is concerned, considering the fact that there is absolutely no allegation of theft against Petitioner No. 2 and clean antecedents, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to Petitioner No. 2 is allowed.
8. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named Petitioner No. 2 be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.41352 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026 3/3 Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-I, Sherghati, District- Gaya in connection with Dobhi P.S. Case No. 40 of 2026, subject to condition as laid down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S..
9. With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed of.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T