Manoj Mishra v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40157 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2026 Thana- NAUTAN District- West Champaran ====================================================== Manoj Mishra S/O- Ramchandra Mishra Resident of Village-Ramnagar Bairiya, Ward no.- 5, PS-Nautan, District- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Shrivastava For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh For the informant :
Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 27.02.2026 in connection with Nautan P.S. Case No. 50 of 2026 for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(1), 109, 351(2), 352 of B.N.S 2023.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant namely Ramchandra Mishra gave his fardbeyan before SubInspector of Police, T.O.P., G.M.C.H., Bettiah Town P.S. stating therein that he has five sons and one daughter and during his life time he was divided his land among all five sons.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from
2/4 perusal of the FIR it appears that due to some land dispute the present occurrence has taken place although there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he has assaulted the father of the informant who is also happened to be his father. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that it appears from the FIR itself that brother of the petitioner has not given the share of the land to the petitioner and due to that reason the present occurrence has taken place. It is also submitted that there is no intention on the part of the petitioner to kill anyone and petitioner has already lodged an FIR against his brother which is annexed at Annexure- 4 and 5 of the bail petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that police after investigation has submitted charge-sheet and petitioner is in custody since 27.02.2026.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner that he has assaulted to the father of the informant and the injury report suggests that the injury is grievous in nature but fairly submits that due to fracture in hand the injury is grievous in nature. Apart from that with respect to one injury the opinion is reserve. It is next submitted that petitioner has antecedent of one
3/4 case other than the present case but fairly submits that the petitioner is on bail in the pending matter.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances as well as period of custody, let the petitioner, above named, 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 the learned CJM, West Champaran, Bettiah in connection with Nautan P.S. Case No. 50 of 2026, subject to the following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
4/4 acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Gaurav Sinha/- U T