Mithalesh Manjhi @ Mithlesh Manjhi v. Vigilance Investigation Bureau Through The Superintendent Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58282 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2025 Thana- VIGILANCE District- Patna ====================================================== Mithalesh Manjhi @ Mithlesh Manjhi Son of Manogi Manjhi villageSaiyadpura, Ward no. 8, Ps- Nagar Nausa, Dist- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Vigilance Investigation Bureau Through the Superintendent of Police bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Amresh Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arvind Kumar, Adv. (Law Officer, Vigilance) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH ORAL ORDER 22-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Special Case No. 16 of 2025 arising out of Vigilance Investigation Bureau P.S. Case No. 27 of 2025 dated 13.05.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Section 7(a) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 06.12.2024, the complainant had scuffled with his villager Vyash Yadav due to land dispute for which both the parties lodged FIR. The Ashanw P.S. Case No. 141/2024 was filed by the side of the complainant and the opposite side filed Ashanw P.S. Case No. 140/2024 and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58282 of 2025(4) dt.22-09-2025 2/3 in that case, the other side has wrongfully made accused to some of the members of the informant's family for which he gave an application to the SDPO, Mairwa on 02.04.2025 and on the same day he also met the I.O., Mithalesh Manjhi (petitioner) who demanded Rs. 20,000/- and a washing machine for removing the names of those, who were wrongfully added in the case. The complainant pleaded his poorness for making payment of such a huge amount but the petitioner told that he would neither help him in the case diary nor he would remove the name of those persons who were wrongfully added.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. It is further submitted that the complainant was pressurizing the petitioner to help in the said case but the petitioner denied the same as a result of which the complainant filed a false case for taking revenge from the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner never demanded any money or washing machine from the complainant. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.58282 of 2025(4) dt.22-09-2025 3/3 14.05.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the allegation made against the petitioner is found true and the said amount was recovered from the possession of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Muzaffarpur in connection with Special Case No. 16 of 2025 arising out of Vigilance Investigation Bureau P.S. Case No. 27 of 2025, with a condition:- (i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bonds of the petitioner are liable to be cancelled.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Chandra Prakash Singh, J) shivam/- U T