Patna High Court
Manindra Pandey @ Majindra Pandey @ Majindra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with specified conditions.
Summary
Manindra Pandey sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in a case alleging forced entry into a house and attempted rape, with charges under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the POCSO Act. The petitioner claimed the allegations were false and stemmed from a long‑standing land dispute, asserting that certain charges were added later and that the victim’s statement did not support the prosecution’s version. The State and the informant opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the alleged offences. The Court, after considering the submissions, granted anticipatory bail subject to a cash bond, sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The order clarified that any observations made would not affect the trial, and the application was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail despite the serious nature of the alleged offences under the BNSS and POCSO Act.
- Whether the allegations are false and motivated by a land dispute, warranting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183, 308(2), 331(2), 331(6), 3(5), 351(2), 352, 62, 74, 75(2), 76
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 12, 8
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- false accusation
- land dispute
- rape
- POCSO
- BNSS
- Criminal Procedure
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.27390 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2025 Thana- GORIAKOTHI District- Siwan
======================================================
Manindra Pandey @ Majindra Pandey @ Majindra Kumar, S/o Hosila
Pandey, R/o Village- Sarari (Ward No. 11), P.S- Goreakothi, Distt.- Siwan.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. VG D/O Y R/O Village- Sarari (Ward No. 11), P.S- Goreakothi, Distt.-
Siwan.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Irshad Ahmad Khan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madhuri Lata, APP
For the Respondent Ms. Ankita Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 17-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.P.P. for the
State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Goreakothi P.S. Case No. 334 of 2025,
registered for the offence(s) under Section(s) 74, 76, 75(2), 62,
308(2), 352, 351(2), 331(2), 331(6) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.) and Sections 8 and 12 of the
POCSO Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the allegation against
the petitioner is that he with the help of co-accused persons, had
entered into the house of informant/victim and forcibly tried to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27390 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
2/4
commit rape upon her. It is further alleged that when the
informant raised hulla, the petitioner tried to break the door of
the room of informant’s mother and thereafter, fled away.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case on
account of long standing land dispute between the parties. It has
further been submitted that Sections 331(2) and 331(6) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita as well as Sections 8 and 12 of the
POCSO Act were added later in this case. It has next been
submitted that the story propounded is purely false and the said
fact can be corroborated from the reading of the statement of
victim who has not stated what has been submitted in the FIR.
From perusal of statement of victim recorded under Section 183
of BNSS, it would appear that there is no allegation of pointing
pistol upon the chest of the victim and as to the fact that the
petitioner had tried to commit rape upon her. In fact, from
perusal of said statement, it would be evident that the victim has
gone to state that the father of the petitioner was demanding Rs.
20 lakhs. It has thus been submitted by the learned counsel for
the petitioner that only on account of long standing land dispute,
out and out, this false case has been registered against the
petitioner who carries clean antecedent.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27390 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
3/4
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State as well as the
learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner and stated
that there is specific allegation against the petitioner to have
forcibly entered into the house of informant and tried to commit
rape upon her.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the
parties, let the petitioner, above-named, be released on
anticipatory bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before
the concerned Court/successor Court within a period of four
weeks from today, on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned
Court/successor Court where the case is pending in connection
with Goreakothi P.S. Case No. 334 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with corresponding Section
482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
(B.N.S.S.) as well as subject to the following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be
his/her close relative and the other shall be a local
resident.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.27390 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
4/4
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of
the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the
concerned Court.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
deepak/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.