Manish Kumar @ Chuha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50387 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2022 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna ====================================================== 1.
Manish Kumar @ Chuha S/o Ram Kumar Singh R/o Village- Tata Colony, P.S.- Maner, District- Patna 2.
Chotu Kumar @ Dharmendra Kumar S/o Siddharth Singh @ Siddhnath Singh R/o Village- Tata Colony, P.S.- Maner, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-07-2025 Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Khagaul P.S. Case No. 168 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 17.06.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 332, 333, 353, 427, 307, 120(B), 337, 338, 506 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3⁄4 of Damage of Public Property Act.
3. As per the First Information Report, the informant alleged that the petitioner was member of mob who were protesting against the government against the Agnipath Scheme. It further alleged that after sometime the protesters in aggressive manner started damaging the vehicles present there and they
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50387 of 2025(2) dt.29-07-2025 2/3 vandalized the police vehicle and set private vehicles on fire. They threw bricks and stones on the police force due to which the police personnel got severe injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. Although the petitioner is named in the FIR but from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner rather the allegation against all the accused persons including the petitioner is general and omnibus in nature and the name of the petitioner transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person, namely, Vikki Kumar.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and the name of the petitioner transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused person, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Danapur in connection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50387 of 2025(2) dt.29-07-2025 3/3 with Khagaul P.S. Case No. 168 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other 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 acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T