Akchhay Manjhi @ Akchhay KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34839 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-685 Year-2025 Thana- GAYA MUFASIL District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Akchhay Manjhi @ Akchhay Kumar S/o Bigan Ram Manjhi Resident of
                 Village - Bhore, P.S. - Muffasil, District - Gaya.
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-05-2026                    Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena, learned counsel for

                   the petitioner as well as Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   30.01.2026 in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 685/2025,

                   F.I.R. dated 14.07.2025 for the offences punishable under

                   Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 109, 329(3), 329(4) and

                   352 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3 and 4

                   of the Witch Protection Act, 1999.

                               3. According to prosecution case, the petitioner along

                   with the other co-accused persons came to the house of the

                   informant having sword and knife and brutally assaulted her

                   husband to his head, back side, neck and other parts of the body

                   due to which he received injuries.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34839 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
                                            2/3


          implicated in the present case. Although, the petitioner is named

          in the F.I.R. but from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is

          no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed

          against the petitioner rather there is general and omnibus

          allegation against the petitioner and other co-accused persons

          along with 20-25 unknown accused persons in the F.I.R. From

          perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that the date of occurrence as

          alleged in the F.I.R. is 12.07.2025 but the present F.I.R. was

          instituted on 14.07.2025 after delay of two days without giving

          any explanation of delay. The co-accused persons namely, Indal

          Manjhi, Balchand Manjhi, Dilchand Manjhi and Dhiraj Manjhi

          have been granted bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated

          20.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 3191 of 2026. He further

          submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge

          sheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since

          30.01.2026.

                      5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor have

          vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

          petitioner has clean antecedent and there is no specific

          allegation of any assault or overt act against the petitioner and

          F.I.R. was instituted after delay of two days, let the petitioner,

          above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

          10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34839 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026
                                                         3/3


                       each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Gaya Ji in

                       connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 685/2025, subject to the

                       following conditions:-

                                    i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

                       properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court

                       and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and

                       on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

                       reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

                                    ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

                       witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to

                       move for cancellation of bail.

                                    iii. And further condition that the court below shall

                       verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

                       any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

                       criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

                       cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

                       acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

                       shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of

                       verification.



                                              (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
atul/-

U        T