Raju Kumar Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86115 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2022 Thana- RASULPUR District- Saran ====================================================== Raju Kumar Manjhi S/o- Vishram Manjhi Village - Chanchaura Bar Tola , P.S - Rasulpur, District - Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Hemant Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Gulnar Begum ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-01-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that her daughter was married to Avinash in the year 2021, after marriage, her daughter had come to her parental home, when on 04.11.2021 the petitioner along with Rakesh came and took her daughter on the pretext that someone was calling her, but her daughter did not return,.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86115 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026 2/3 informant. It is next submitted that the petitioner and the victim were known to each other. It is also submitted that they both worked in orchestra but then the informant concealing the said fact had performed her marriage with Avinash but the victim came back and accompanied the petitioner to the orchestra where they were working from before. It is further submitted that victim had come back and her statement has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has supported the case of the prosecution and has stated that petitioner has sold her for Rs. 1 lakh in an orchestra but then the said statement has been made only to implicate the petitioner under parental pressure.
It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that the date of occurrence is 04.11.2021 and the FIR came to be instituted on 01.06.2022 i.e. nearly a delay of six months, which casts an aspersion on the case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that till date no process under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued. It is further submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State Ms. Gulnar Begum opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86115 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026 3/3 counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that FIR was instituted after a delay of nearly six months.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Rasulpur P.S. Case No.142/2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) amit/- U T