Patna High Court
Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The appeal is dismissed and regular bail is denied.
Summary
Manoj Kumar appealed against the order of the Exclusive Special Judge that denied him regular bail in a case involving arson, looting and assault on a Scheduled Caste informant. The appellant alleged that he was falsely implicated, that the allegations were vague and that no specific overt act could be linked to him, and that the essential ingredients of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act were not satisfied. The State and the second respondent contended that the appellant had previously assaulted the informant, threatened his family, and was habitually involved in organized criminal activities, citing several pending cases against him. The High Court examined the seriousness of the allegations, the appellant’s criminal antecedents and the risk of witness tampering. Finding the accusations serious and the pattern of habitual criminal conduct credible, the Court declined to grant regular bail. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and the bail denial upheld.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to regular bail despite allegations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the facts alleged constitute an offence under Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
- Whether the appellant’s prior criminal record and alleged propensity to influence witnesses justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 191(2), 326(g)
- Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(1)(r)(s)
Subjects
- regular bail
- SC/ST Act
- habitual offender
- arson
- intimidation
- witness tampering
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.59 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-340 Year-2025 Thana- DIDARGANJ District- Patna
======================================================
Manoj Kumar S/O Late Suresh Singh R/O Village - Nijampur, P.S- Didarganj,
Distt.- Patna
... ... Appellant
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Indrajeet Kumar S/O Shri Parmanand Bhagat R/O Vill.- Rampur
Shyamchand, P.S- Raghopur,Dist- Vaishali.At present R/O Village -
Nijampur, P.S- Didarganj, Distt.- Patna
... ... Respondents
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant : Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, Spl. P.P.
For the Resp. No.2 : Mr. Gautam Kejriwal, Advocate
Mr. Vinayak Harshvardhan, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 07-07-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the
learned Spl. PP for the State and the learned counsel for the
respondent no.2.
2. The present appeal has been preferred for
setting aside the order dated 03.12.2025 passed by the learned
Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Patna in Special Case No.
479 of 2025, arising out of Didarganj P.S. Case No. 340 of 2025,
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2),
115(2), 126(2), 326(g) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled
Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, whereby the prayer for
regular bail of the appellant was rejected.
3. The appellant and others are said to have set
the house of the informant, who is a member of S.C./S.T.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.59 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
2/4
community, on fire and looted the household articles. It is
further alleged that earlier also altercation took place between
the parties, in respect of which, the informant had also lodged
an F.I.R. being Didarganj P.S. Case No.209 of 2025.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits
that the appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is
further submitted that the allegations against the appellant are
general and omnibus in nature and no specific overt act has been
attributed to him. It is also submitted that during investigation,
no independent witness has supported the allegation against the
appellant. It is further submitted that the appellant has been
implicated merely on suspicion and that the essential ingredients
of the offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act
are not attracted against him.
5. The learned Special PP for the State and the
learned counsel for the respondent no.2 have vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail. It is further submitted that the
accused persons, including the appellant, had earlier also
assaulted the informant, for which Didarganj P.S. Case No.209
of 2025 was registered. The accused persons have been
continuously threatening the informant and his family members
with dire consequences, including murder.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.59 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
3/4
6. It is further alleged that the appellant and his
associates are alleged to be habitually involved in such criminal
activities affecting public order and peaceful possession of
property.
7. It is also submitted that apart from the
present case, multiple criminal cases are pending against the
appellant and his associates, namely: (a) Didarganj P.S. Case
No. 355 of 2025; (b) Didarganj P.S. Case No. 209 of 2025; (c)
Didarganj P.S. Case No. 358 of 2025; (d) Didarganj P.S. Case
No. 81 of 2026, (e) Didarganj P.S. Case No. 340 of 2025 and
recently, the appellant and his associates have again assaulted
the informant and other persons and in respect of the said
incident, the informant has also filed an F.I.R. vide Didarganj
P.S. Case No.129 of 2026 on 23.05.2026.
8. It is further submitted that the accused
persons, including the appellant, are involved in a pattern of
organized criminal activities including extortion, intimidation,
and repeated violent acts, thereby posing a serious threat to law
and order in the locality.
9. I have considered the submissions of the
parties.
10. Having considered the rival submissions and
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.59 of 2026(2) dt.07-07-2026
4/4
upon careful perusal of the material available on record, this
Court finds that the allegations against the appellant are serious
in nature. The appellant is also shown to be involved in several
other criminal cases of similar nature, reflecting a pattern of
habitual criminal activity. The possibility of the appellant
influencing witnesses and repeating similar offences cannot be
ruled out at this stage.
11. In view of the gravity of the allegations, the
criminal antecedents of the appellant, and the overall facts and
circumstances of the case, this Court is not inclined to grant the
privilege of regular bail to the appellant.
12. Accordingly, the present appeal stands
dismissed.
13. It is made clear that any observation made
herein is prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose
of adjudication of the present bail application. Such
observations shall not be construed as an expression on the
merits of the case and shall not influence the trial or any other
proceedings in any manner.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
pawan/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.