Manoj Kumar Singh @ Manoj Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50051 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-103 Year-2025 Thana- RAGHUNATHPUR District- Siwan ====================================================== MANOJ KUMAR SINGH @ MANOJ SINGH S/O LATE PASUPATINATH SINGH R/O VILLAGE- NARHAN, P.S.- RAGHUNATHPUR, DISTRICTSIWAN ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, Advocate Mr. Ashok Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bharat Bhushan, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 17-10-2025 Heard Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP, Mr. Bharat Bhushan for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 103 of 2025 for the offence under sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 118(1), 351(2), 352, 303(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. lodged 24.04.2025 by the informant, Sunil Singh.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that on the land dispute between the parties, the allegation is that Bindeshwar Singh and Tejbahadur Singh gave rod blow to Vidya Singh while Shakti Singh and Tejbahadur Singh caught hold of the hands. Further allegation against this petitioner if of
2/4 using knife to assault on the head and Arvind Singh and Hardeshwar Singh took away some amount. As he came to the rescue, allegation is that he was also threatened and thereafter, they retreated. The injured was shifted to the hospital which followed the FIR.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a case and counter-case due to land dispute between the parties, both sides have suffered injuries, so far as the injury inflicted by this petitioner is concerned, he has taken this Court to the two Injury Reports which are Annexure-P/3 to show that all the injury nos. 1 to 7 including that on the forehead caused by this petitioner has been found to be simple in nature. Further, the submission is that without accepting the allegation and/or the outcome of the present petition in view of the fact that the informant's side has alleged injuries, the petitioner on its own would like to contribute Rs. 5,000/- towards the medical assistance of the injured through Demand Draft issued by the local State Bank of India/any Nationalized Bank branch to be submitted before the 'NAZARAT' of concerned Court to be handed over to the injured through the informant after checking the credentials.
5. Learned APP opposes the prayer submitting that
3/4 allegation of using knife is against this petitioner.
6. Taking into account the submissions of the parties as also that the injuries have been found to be simple in nature and this petitioner do not have any criminal antecedent, in that background, this Court is inclined to extend him the privilege of anticipatory bail with conditions subject to payment of Rs. 5,000/- as undertaken by the learned counsel for the petitioner to be paid by Demand Draft of local State Bank of India branch/any Nationalized bank branch to be submitted to the Trial Court and to be handed over to the injured through the informant.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail in the event of arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the receipt of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M. 1st Class/concerned Court in connection with Raghunathpur P.S. Case No. 103 of 2025 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
(i) one of the bailor should be the family member/relative of the petitioner who shall provide official document to show his/her bona fide;
4/4 (ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned police station every fortnight for next six months to mark his attendance;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds. (Rajiv Roy, J) Adnan/- U T