Vinay Kumar Manjhi @ Vinay Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66751 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-506 Year-2025 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Vinay Kumar Manjhi @ Vinay Kumar S/O Bhola Lal Manjhi R/O Vill.- Wajidpur, P.S.- Garkha, Dist.- Saran.
2.
Monu Kumar @ Mannu Kumar S/O Vinay Kumar Manjhi @ Vinay Kumar R/O Vill.- Wajidpur, P.S.- Garkha, Dist.- Saran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Informant :
Mr. Satish Kumar Pandey, Advocte For the State :
Mr. Nawal Kishore Prasad, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. This application for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Garkha Police Station Case No. 506 of 2025, corresponding to G.R. No. 6579 of 2025, disclosing offences under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 303(2), 352 and 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
3. The allegation against petitioner no.1 is that he assaulted the informant with knife on his head and petitioner no. 2 assaulted with iron rod causing injury near the elbow of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66751 of 2025(4) dt.25-02-2026 2/3 there is long standing land dispute between petitioners' side and informant which would be evident from FIR itself. Counter case has been lodged by the side of the petitioners bearing Garkha P.S. Case No. 542 of 2025 against the informant and others under Section 109 and other allied sections of B.N.S., 2023. The allegation of assault upon the petitioner no. 1 is by knife which is sharp cutting weapon but the doctor has given the opinion regarding cause of injury as hard and blunt substance. The doctor has subsequently opined the nature of injury as simple. Petitioner No. 1 is working in the Railway as ESM-1.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioners that they assaulted the informant by means of knife as well as iron rod, the informant has sustained serious injury on the head which would be evident from the photograph annexed with a counter affidavit filed on behalf of the informant. The petitioners have been threatening the informant's side due to land dispute regularly and it has become very difficult for the side of informant to live in the village peacefully as the petitioners are very influential person. The seriousness of the injury would be evident from the fact that the informant remained unconscious
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66751 of 2025(4) dt.25-02-2026 3/3 for three days which has been mentioned in the FIR.
6. Regards being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and taking into consideration the fact that there is long standing land dispute between the parties, case and counter case is there, the injury sustained by the informant, is simple in nature, I am inclined to grant the petitioners privilege of anticipatory bail.
7. This application is, accordingly, allowed.
8. Let the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the Court below within four weeks, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVII, Saran at Chapra, in connection with Garkha Police Station Case No. 506 of 2025, subject to the condition laid down under Section 482 (2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Anil Kumar Sinha, J) Siwani/- U T