Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Manoj Ram @ Shashi Bhushan Ram @ Manoj KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

Anticipatory bail was denied.

Summary

Manoj Ram, the petitioner, feared arrest in a case (Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 16 of 2026) filed under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The FIR alleged that the petitioner was among several persons who fled the scene after a shooting that injured the informant’s father. The petitioner claimed innocence, argued that the allegations were vague, and offered to comply with any conditions. The State opposed anticipatory bail, noting the petitioner’s name in the FIR and a pending dispute. The High Court, after hearing both sides, declined to grant anticipatory bail and ordered the petitioner to surrender within six weeks, directing the trial court to consider any bail application thereafter.

Issues considered

  • Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the Arms Act
  • Whether the presence of a pending criminal case and the nature of the FIR justify denial of anticipatory bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Arms Act
  • FIR
  • bail application

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21694 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2026 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Manoj Ram @ Shashi Bhushan Ram @ Manoj Kumar S/o Ram Avtar Ram
                 Resident of Village- Baulipur, P.S. Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Gajendra Nath Ojha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Nagendra Prasad, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-04-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 16 of 2026, dated 08.01.2026,

                   lodged under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya

                   Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”) and

                   under Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending before the Court of

                   A.C.J.M.,-1, Bhojpur (Ara).

                                3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against

                   4 named and 3-4 unknown accused persons, including the

                   present petitioner, with the allegation that when the informant’s

                   father was going to his house after shutting down the shop, the

                   informant heard the sound of firing. When he rushed to the

                   place of occurrence, he saw that his father had fallen on the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21694 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                            2/3




          road, oozing blood, and the petitioner and 3-4 unknown persons

          were fleeing from the spot.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel

          further submits that the allegations are general and omnibus in

          nature. Counsel also submits that the criminal antecedent of the

          petitioner is not clean, as there is one criminal case pending

          against him. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is ready

          to comply with all conditions whatsoever shall be imposed upon

          him.

                       5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is named in

          the FIR. Counsel also submits that as per the FIR, there is also a

          pending dispute involving the petitioner.

                       6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is

          not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

          Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is

          hereby rejected.

                       7. It is directed to the petitioner to surrender before

          the Trial Court within a period of 6 weeks from today. In case,

          the petitioner surrenders within six weeks, then the Trial Court

          is directed to pass order on his surrender-cum-bail application
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21694 of 2026(2) dt.08-04-2026
                                                      3/3




                    on the same day without being prejudice that the anticipatory

                    bail of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court and the

                    Trial Court shall pass order on the merit of this case.



                                                               (Dr. Anshuman, J.)


Aman Kumar/-

U     T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.