Patna High Court
Parmanand Manjhi @ Parmanand KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court allowed the anticipatory bail application, subject to bond and surety conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, three brothers from Gaya, applied for anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging kidnapping for marriage, criminal intimidation and related offences under IPC sections 366(A), 504, 506 and 34. The informant claimed his 16‑year‑old daughter was lured and eloped with the petitioners, but the petitioners argued that the victim was actually 18 at the time of the alleged incident and that the relationship was consensual. They asserted they have clean antecedents, that no specific allegations were made against two of the brothers, and that they would cooperate with the investigation. The State opposed the bail, fearing the accused might abscond or tamper with evidence. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The application was therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the accused under IPC sections 366(A), 504, 506 and 34.
- Whether the alleged victim was a minor at the time of the alleged offence.
- Whether the accused are likely to abscond, tamper with evidence or otherwise obstruct the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164, 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 366A, 504, 506
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping for marriage
- IPC
- minor consent
- bail conditions
- CrPC
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16525 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-537 Year-2022 Thana- ATRI District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Parmanand Manjhi @ Parmanand Kumar Son of Shiv Kumar Manjhi R/o
Village - Panditpur Sohadi, P.S. - Atri, District - Gaya.
2. Shiv Kumar Manjhi @ Shiv Kumar Late Nanhak Manjhi R/o Village -
Panditpur Sohadi, P.S. - Atri, District - Gaya.
3. Ganesh Manjhi Son of Dileep Manjhi R/o Village - Karpi, P.S. - Mahkar,
District - Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Parmeshwar Vishwakarma
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binod Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 07-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 366(A), 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the
informant alleges that his minor daughter aged about 16 years
was living at his cousin sister’s place where petitioners came
and enticed her on pretext of marriage and eloped with the
victim and accordingly, informant called father of Parmanand
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16525 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
2/3
Manjhi and disclosed about the occurrence when he abused and
threatened him.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the instant case by
the informant. It is next submitted that victim and Parmanand
were in love and the victim eloped with him. It is further
submitted that in order to give seriousness to the case, it is
alleged that victim was a minor when her date of birth as per her
matriculation certificate is 03.04.2004 and the case was
instituted in the Year 2022, by then the victim was 18 years of
age. It is also submitted that victim has come back and her
statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she
has stated that she stayed with Parmanand at Hajipur for twenty
days, but subsequently, Parmanand resiled from marrying her. It
is thus submitted that this amply demonstrates that the
relationship was consensual between two consenting adults. It is
also submitted that no specific allegation is alleged against the
petitioner nos.2 and 3. It is next submitted that if privilege of
anticipatory bail is granted, the petitioners will not abscond
rather will cooperate in the investigation to prove their
innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16525 of 2026(2) dt.07-04-2026
3/3
application.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners, above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks, are directed to be released on
anticipatory bail on their furnishing bail-bonds in the sum of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each 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
Atri P. S. Case No.537 of 2022, subject to the conditions laid
down under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.
7. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…