Patna High Court
Manish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
The court held that, in the absence of any material evidence beyond the co‑accused’s disclosure, anticipatory bail is warranted.
Summary
Manish Kumar applied for anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in a case involving theft, forgery and common intention (IPC §§ 379, 414, 467, 468, 471, 34). The FIR alleged that a stolen vehicle was recovered and two persons were arrested; the petitioner’s name was mentioned only because the arrested persons disclosed it, with no other material linking him to the vehicle. The petitioner asserted he had no connection with the stolen vehicle and no criminal antecedent. The State opposed the bail, but the court noted the lack of substantive evidence against the petitioner. Consequently, the court granted anticipatory bail, subject to surrender within four weeks, a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, and conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the only allegation against the petitioner is based on disclosure by co‑accused persons.
- Whether the petitioner satisfies the criteria for bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 379, 414, 467, 468, 471
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Indian Penal Code
- theft
- forgery
- common intention
- bail conditions
- co‑accused disclosure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2866 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-241 Year-2023 Thana- KAKO District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Manish Kumar S/o Ravel Prasad R/o Jilal Bigha, P.O.- Rewan, Rewan,P.S.-
Masauri Dist.- Patna, BIhar- 804454
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vishal Prasad
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Lakshmi Kant Sharma
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 379, 414,
467, 468, 471, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation in the first information report is that
the stolen vehicle was recovered by the police and two persons
were arrested along with the vehicle.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner was not found along with the vehicle and has no
connection whatsoever with the stolen vehicle. The name of the
petitioner has been disclosed by the arrested person for certain
oblique motive and there is no other substantial material
featuring against him but for the disclosure made by the arrested
persons which has no evidentiary value in the eyes of law.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2866 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/2
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the
application for anticipatory bail.
6. Taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances and also considering the fact that the petitioner’s
name has featured on the basis of disclosure made by the
arrested persons, let the above named petitioner, who has no
criminal antecedent, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks
from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with Kako P.S.
Case No. 241 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down
under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
devendra/-
U T
Checking your session…