Mukesh Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84216 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-603 Year-2025 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Mukesh Manjhi Son of Devnath Manjhi, R/o Village - Adhupur, P.S. - Garkha, Dist. - Saran at Chapra.
2.
Bhuwar Manjhi @ Bhisham Manjhi Son of Devnath Manjhi, R/o Village - Adhupur, P.S. - Garkha, Dist. - Saran at Chapra. ... ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Shrinath Manjhi, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-12-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Garkha P.S. Case No. 603 of 2025, dated 09.08.2025, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 76, 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 351(3) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the coaccused persons armed with sharp weapons came at the doors of the informant at night and started abusing him. On his protest, the co-accused persons with an intention to kill the informant attacked him by means of iron-rod, dab and farsa on his head causing injury. When the other family members of the informant
2/4 came to his rescue, they were also assaulted, causing injuries to them. The co-accused persons also looted ornaments worth Rs. 70,000/- and Rs. 13,000/- cash and threatened with dire consequences.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against these petitioners, rather the allegations against them are general and omnibus. The specific allegation of assault is against other co-accused persons namely, Gabbar Manjhi and Ganesh Manjhi, who along with another co-accused Vijay Manjhi have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 03.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 79041 of 2025. Learned counsel lastly submits that petitioner have clean antecedent.
5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act against these petitioners, their clean antecedent and further considering the privilege of
3/4 grant of anticipatory bail to the co-accused persons against whom there is specific allegation, let the petitioners, abovenamed, be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned trial Court within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Saran at Chapra, in connection with Garkha P.S. Case No. 603 of 2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. / Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., as well as on the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailors should be the family member / relative of the petitioner(s), who shall provide official document to show his / her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner(s) shall appear on each and every date before the learned trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his / her / their bail bond by the learned trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner(s) shall in no way try to induce or promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidence,
4/4 failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of the bail bond;
(iv) the petitioner(s) shall desist from committing any criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for cancellation of their bail bonds. (Ajit Kumar, J) Shahnawaz/- U T