Patna High Court
Manish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
Bail was not granted to the petitioner.
Summary
Manish Kumar was arrested in connection with a case involving damage to Indian Oil’s petroleum and gas pipelines, alleged use of explosives, and other offenses. He is charged under IPC sections 379, 511, 427, 285 and 120(B), as well as sections 15(2) and 15(4) of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline Act, 1962, and provisions of the Explosive Substance Act, the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act and the EC Act. The petitioner had earlier given a self‑incriminating confession and has nine similar prior antecedents, and he has been in custody since March 2024. On a second bail application, the High Court examined whether the seriousness of the offences, the confession and the antecedents justified the denial of bail. Finding the offences grave and the petitioner’s conduct culpable, the Court refused bail, directed the trial court to frame charges promptly, and dismissed the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused who has confessed to the offences and has multiple prior similar antecedents.
- Whether the nature of the offences (pipeline sabotage, use of explosives, criminal conspiracy) warrants denial of bail under the applicable statutes.
Legislation cited
- Explosive Substance Act, 1908 — s. 3/4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 285, 379, 427, 511
- Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act — s. 3/4
Subjects
- bail
- criminal conspiracy
- pipeline sabotage
- explosives
- Indian Penal Code
- Petroleum and Minerals Pipeline Act
- high court
- charge framing
- self‑confession
- antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28148 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2024 Thana- SALIMPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Manish Kumar S/o- Sri Sukhram Yadav Village- Biskurba Ps- Belchhi Dist-
Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. through its DGR Supervision, Barauni Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Kashyap, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Madhura Nand Jha, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
7 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for
grant of bail in connection with Salimpur P.S. Case No. 03 of 2024
registered for the offence under Sections 379, 511, 427, 285, 120 (B)
of the I.P.C and Sections 15 (2), 15 (4) of Petroleum and Minerals
Pipe Line (Acquisition of Right of user in land) Act 1962, and ¾ of
Explosive Substance Act, 1908, and 3/4 of Prevention to damage of
Public Property Act and 7 E.C. Act.
3. Earlier the prayer of the petitioner was rejected on
24.07.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 49115 of 2024, which reads as under:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,
learned APP for the State and learned counsel
for the O.P. No.02
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in the present
case registered for the offence under Sections
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28148 of 2025(7) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
379, 511, 427, 285, 120(B) of the Indian Penal
Code and under Section 15(2),15(4) of Petroleum
and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of
user in Land) Act, under Section ¾ of the
Explosive Substance Act, under Section 7 of the
Prevention of Damage of Public Property Act
and under Section 7 of the E.C. Act.
3. Petitioner's involvement have surfaced during
investigation. He has given a self-inculpatory
confessional statement that he had participated
in the crime. He has nine similar antecedents.
The petitioner and other criminals are damaging
the petroleum pipeline as well as the gas pipeline
of Indian Oil. Petitioner is in jail since
22.03.2024.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to
the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is
hereby rejected.
4. The learned counsel for the Indian Oil has submitted
that the Indian Oil is trying for framing of charge against the accused
persons but it is the accused persons who are delaying the framing of
charge to take the benefits in the bail proceedings.
5. Considering the gravity of the offence , this Court is
not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner in the
present case.
6. The Court below is directed to frame the charge at
the earliest and proceed with the trial and if the accused persons are
not produced from the Jail, the trial court will ask the I.G. Prisons to
ensure the production of all the accused for framing of charge.
7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this
application is dismissed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28148 of 2025(7) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
District Magistrate, Patna and the I.G. presence, Bihar through FAX
for its compliance forthwith.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
vashudha/-
U T
Checking your session…