Manish Kumar Yadav @ Manish Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87310 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-199 Year-2025 Thana- GOGRI District- Khagaria ====================================================== Manish Kumar Yadav @ Manish Kumar Son of Navod Yadav Resident of Village - Naya Tola Taufir, P.S.- Gogri, District - Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Hafiz Shahbaz Arif, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Yogendra Kumar, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Chitranjan Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 126(2), 329(4), 308(5), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. and later on, Section 103 of the B.N.S. was added.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that this petitioner, along with other F.I.R. named accused persons, looted cash and jewellery from the informant.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is quite innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case with ulterior

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87310 of 2025(2) dt.17-12-2025 2/2 motive. No looted article were recovered from possession of this petitioner. Petitioner is in custody since 09.10.2025.

5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific accusation that he, along with other accused persons, looted cash and jewellery from the informant. Petitioner has got four criminal antecedents, some of which are of similar nature.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, specific and direct nature of accusation, criminal antecedent of the petitioner and gravity of offence, the prayer for grant bail of to the petitioner is rejected.

7. However, considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 09.10.2025, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T