Patna High Court
Dinesh ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied as the court was not inclined to grant it given the direct allegations and seriousness of the offence.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Manjhi, was arrested in connection with an assault on Jairam Manjhi on 8 May 2025, during which bricks and a cudgel were used, causing serious head injuries. He is charged under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352, 3(5) and 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner, claiming no prior criminal record and alleging false implication, applied for bail, arguing that the FIR was lodged five days after the incident and no material was recovered from him. The State opposed bail, citing direct allegations against the petitioner and a post‑mortem report that corroborates the charge. The Court, after considering the seriousness of the allegations and the evidence, refused bail, directing the trial court to expedite the trial and allowing the petitioner to re‑apply for bail if the trial exceeds six months.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner in light of the serious nature of the offences and the existence of direct allegations supported by a post‑mortem report.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103, 109, 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- assault
- serious injury
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- pre‑trial detention
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72969 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2025 Thana- DARIYAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Dinesh Manjhi S/o Late Gulab Manjhi R/o Village- Dariyapur, P.S.-
Dariyapur, Distt.- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Mohammad Sufyan, APP
For the Informant : Ms. Shweta, Advocate
Mr. Vivek Raj, Advocate
Mr. Pranjal Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 13-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Dariyapur P.S. Case No. 256 of 2025 instituted for the offence
under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 352 & 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (B.N.S.), 2023. Subsequently, Section
103 of the BNS.
3. On 08.05.2025 at about 12:30 P.M., while returning
from a wedding procession, the informant’s husband Jairam
Manjhi was allegedly assaulted by the accused persons, who
attacked him from behind, abused him, and inflicted serious
head injuries with a kudal and bricks with an intention to kill.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72969 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026
2/3
4. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that the petitioner is in custody since 15.05.2025. Petitioner
bears no criminal antecedent/s, as per disclosure made in
paragraph No. 3 of the bail application.
5. It has been further submitted by the petitioner’s
counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present
case. From perusal of the FIR, it would reveal that petitioner
and co-accused allegedly attacked with bricks on the head of the
deceased. There is delay of five days in lodging the FIR.
Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of
the petitioner. Charge sheet has already been submitted in this
case.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is
submitted that there is specific allegation against the petitioner.
Moreover, postmortem report also corroborates the allegation
levelled against the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and specifically taking into account the fact that
there being direct allegation against the petitioner, this Court is
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of
bail is hereby rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72969 of 2025(3) dt.13-01-2026
3/3
8. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as
expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and
unnecessary adjournments.
9. However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his
prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within a period of six
months.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…