Patna High Court
Pappu ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted to the petitioner given his criminal antecedents and the gravity of the offences.
Summary
The petitioner, Pappu Manjhi, applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 399 and 402 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1‑b) of the Arms Act, alleging that he was falsely implicated in a planned dacoity. The prosecution alleged his involvement and highlighted his 23 prior criminal antecedents, noting that he has been in custody since 26‑10‑2022. The petitioner’s counsel argued that his name appeared only in the co‑accused’s statement and that he would cooperate with the trial. The Additional Public Prosecutor opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s criminal history. The Court, after considering the antecedents and the nature of the offences, declined to grant bail and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the serious nature of the offences and his extensive criminal antecedents
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 399, 402
Subjects
- bail
- dacoity
- criminal antecedents
- IPC
- Arms Act
- regular bail
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21824 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-41 Year-2022 Thana- PARSA District- Saran
======================================================
Pappu Manjhi Son of Jawahar Manjhi R/o Village - Sikti, P.S. - Parsa, Dist. -
Saran at Chapra.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 07-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Parsa
P.S. Case No. 41/2022 registered for the offences punishable
under Sections 399, 402 of I.P.C. and Section 25(1-b) of Arms
Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner along with
others are accused of planning to commit dacoity.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the case. It is next
submitted that the name of the petitioner has come in the
statement of the co-accused. Learned counsel further submits
that he has 23 criminal antecedents and he is in custody since
26.10.2022 because he is remanded in Morba P.S. Case No.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21824 of 2026(3) dt.07-04-2026
2/2
671/2022. The petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the case/
trial.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the prayer
for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the criminal antecedents of the
petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
7. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
tusharika/-
U T
Checking your session…