Patna High Court
Manish Mandal @ Nagmani MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- AJIT KUMAR
Holding
The court denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Manish Mandal applied for anticipatory bail after an FIR was lodged against him for offences under Sections 309(4) and 27 of the Arms Act, relating to a robbery in which a victim’s brother‑in‑law was attacked and Rs 2.5 lakhs were stolen. The petitioner claimed the FIR was malicious, asserted his innocence, and argued that his prior convictions were not mentioned in the bail application. The State opposed the bail, highlighting Mandal’s two earlier convictions (for murder, attempted murder and offences under the Arms Act, and for dacoity) and stating that the motorcycle used in the crime belonged to him, with his involvement emerging from a co‑accused’s confessional statement. The court examined the allegations, the petitioner’s criminal antecedents, and the evidentiary material, and concluded that the seriousness of the allegations and the petitioner’s history warranted denial of bail. Consequently, the anticipatory bail prayer was rejected and the bail application dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite his prior criminal convictions and the alleged involvement in the robbery.
- Whether the evidence, including the ownership of the motorcycle and confessional statements of co‑accused, justifies denial of anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27, 309(4)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 307, 34, 395, 397
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Arms Act
- robbery
- prior convictions
- habitual offender
- bail denial
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19792 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-593 Year-2025 Thana- BANKA District- Banka
======================================================
Manish Mandal @ Nagmani Mandal son of Bateshwar Mandal Resident of
village- Vijay nagar PS- Banka District- Banka
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sudhir Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Naresh Ray, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJIT KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 19-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State through virtual mode.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in
connection with Banka P.S. Case No. 593 of 2025, dated
26.12.2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections
309(4) and 27 of Arms Act.
3. As per the FIR, on 26.12.2025, the informant’s
brother-in-law withdrew Rs. 2.5 lacs from SBI A.D.B. Branch
Banka, he was going to his home, two unknown persons
attacked on him with same kind of weapon, as a result of which
he fell down from his motorcycle and they attacked him and
snatched Rs. 2.5 lakhs. Thereafter, the victim was brought to
Sadar Hospital wherein he was referred to Mayaganj Hospital,
Bhagalpur for better treatment.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19792 of 2026(3) dt.19-05-2026
2/4
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner is quite innocent and has been
falsely implicated in this case. The allegations made in the First
Information Report is malicious and has been made with ulterior
motive by the informant while no such incident is said to have
been taken place. It is further submitted that the FIR was lodged
against unknown and on the basis of confessional statement, the
name of the petitioner transpired in this case. Learned counsel
for the petitioner fairly submitted that the petitioner has two
criminal antecedents, bearing (1) Banka P.S. Case No. 95 of
2014 dated 25.03.2014 under section 302, 307/34 of I.P.C. and
27 of Arms Act and (2) Banka P.S. Case No. 44 of 2015 dated
23.01.2015 under section 395 and 397 both registered at Banka
P.S. against him. It has further been submitted that the petitioner
is currently on bail in both the cases; however, due to
inadvertence, the same could not be mentioned in paragraph 3
of the instant anticipatory bail application.
5. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State
opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail by submitting that the
petitioner is a habitual offender and has two criminal
antecedents. It is further submitted that the informant’s brother-
in-law was returning home after withdrawing Rs. 2.5 lakhs from
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19792 of 2026(3) dt.19-05-2026
3/4
the SBI, A.D.B. Branch, Banka and when he reached near
Murhara Road, two unknown persons armed with weapon
attacked him and snatched the said amount. It is further
submitted that the motorcycle which was used in commission of
the crime belonged to the petitioner, which fact has been stated
by the family member of the petitioner and the reference of the
same can be made from paragraph-43 of the case diary. It is also
submitted that due to the injuries sustained in the occurrence,
the injured was first taken to Sadar Hospital for primary
treatment and thereafter referred to Mayaganj Hospital,
Bhagalpur for better treatment. Lastly, it is submitted that a
person having such antecedents and alleged involvement in
offences of similar nature should not be extended the privilege
of anticipatory bail.
6. Taking into account the fact that the motorcycle
used in commission of the crime belonged to the petitioner and
his participation has surfaced during the course of investigation
on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused as well
as statements of his family member, coupled with the fact that
the petitioner has two criminal antecedents, this Court is not
inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.
Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19792 of 2026(3) dt.19-05-2026
4/4
7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands
dismissed.
(Ajit Kumar, J)
shikha/suryadev
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.