Afsar Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.77 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-350 Year-2025 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya ====================================================== Afsar Manjhi S/O Karma Manjhi R/O Vill.- Narawat, P.S.- Atri, Dist.- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
X D/O Y R/O Vill.- Narawavat, P.S.- Atri, Dist.- Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State :
Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 01-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Atri P.S. Case no. 350 of 2025 registered under sections 126(2), 174, 75 and 76 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and sections 8 and 12 of the POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the 12 year old informant states that when she along with her 10 year old sister had gone to collect firewood for making meal, it is stated that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026 2/3 the petitioner who was in an intoxicated state caught hold of the informant and his sister and tore their clothes. On hulla being raised and the co-villagers running to their rescue, the accused escaped.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. No such occurrence has taken place. The cause of false implication is that the father of the informant was involved in sale of country liquor and on the petitioner threatening to report the matter to the police, he has been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner is in custody since 29.8.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. He undertakes to cooperate in the investigation/trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Learned counsel for the informant submits that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of having misbehaved with the minor informant and her minor sister in an intoxicated state.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the FIR together with the material that has transpired in course of investigation, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.77 of 2026(3) dt.01-04-2026 3/3
7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months or on framing of charge, whichever is later.
(Partha Sarthy, J) sauravkrsinha/- U T