Patna High Court
Sugan Manjhi @ Sugan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- HARISH KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that pre‑arrest bail is warranted due to the delayed and questionable FIR, granting bail subject to conditions under Section 482(2).
Summary
The petitioner, Sugan Manjhi, sought pre‑arrest bail after the police lodged FIR No. 207 of 2023 under Sections 25(1‑ba), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, alleging possession of an illegal firearm. He contended that the FIR was filed belatedly and was based on a prior case (FIR No. 117 of 2019) in which he had reported a pistol that was later handed over to police, and that the new FIR unjustly implicated him. The State opposed the bail, arguing the seriousness of the arms offences. The Court noted the delay in filing the FIR, the lack of evidence linking the petitioner to the alleged offence, and his clean antecedents, concluding that the FIR appeared to be a retaliatory measure. Accordingly, the Court granted pre‑arrest bail subject to a Rs.10,000 bond, two sureties, and the condition that one bailor be a close family member, invoking Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The order directed the petitioner to surrender within four weeks if arrested.
Issues considered
- Whether pre‑arrest bail can be granted in a case under the Arms Act where the FIR was lodged after a significant delay.
- Whether the delay and alleged false basis of the FIR justify bail under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1‑ba), 26, 35
- Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- pre‑arrest bail
- Arms Act
- delay in FIR
- false complaint
- Section 482
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40474 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-207 Year-2023 Thana- SIKANDRA District- Jamui
======================================================
Sugan Manjhi @ Sugan Kumar Son of Umesh manjhi R/O Vill.- Shivdih,
P.O.- Pathak Chak, P.S.- Sikandra, Dist.- Jamui
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Mishra, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 01-07-2026 Heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Sikandra P.S. Case No. 207 of 2023, registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the
Arms Act.
3. Based upon the written report, the prosecution
alleges that earlier the petitioner had filed Sikandra P.S. Case
No. 117 of 2019 against one Raju Manjhi, who was
apprehended by the petitioner along with a country made pistol,
which was handed over to the police personnel. However,
during the course of investigation, the police has submitted final
form against the said Raju Manjhi and directed to institute FIR
against the petitioner and accordingly, the present FIR came to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40474 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
2/3
be instituted.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that
the earlier FIR was lodged in the year 2019 and later on, during
the course of investigation, the police has submitted final form,
against the accused of the said case, but surprisingly without
showing the complicity of the petitioner, the present FIR has
been instituted, alleging arms, which was recovered in
connection with Sikandra P.S. Case No. 117 of 2019 belongs to
the petitioner. There is no explanation with respect to the delay
in completion of the investigation and lodging of the present
FIR for the offences punishable under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and
35 of the Arms Act. Moreover, the petitioner bears fair
antecedent and he undertakes that he will fully co-operate in the
proceeding of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State
opposed the pre-arrest bail application.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on
behalf of the parties and considering the fact that the present
FIR has been instituted only on account of the fact that during
the course of investigation, in connection with Sikandra P.S.
Case No. 117 of 2019, instituted by the petitioner, has been
found false, besides delay in lodging of the present FIR and the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40474 of 2026(2) dt.01-07-2026
3/3
fair antecedent of the petitioner, let the petitioner above named
be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before
the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail
bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial
Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamui in connection with Sikandra P.S.
Case No. 207 of 2023, subject to the conditions laid down in
Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
with the further condition that one of the bailors shall be the
own/close family members of the petitioner.
(Harish Kumar, J)
shivank/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.