Patna High Court
Shankar KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PURNENDU SINGH
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner has a prima facie case for anticipatory bail and ordered his release on such bail if arrested or surrendered.
Summary
Shankar Kumar petitioned the Patna High Court for anticipatory bail after learning that he might be arrested in connection with Mahakar P.S. Case No. 118 of 2025, which involves the alleged disappearance of a 14‑year‑old girl and is registered under Sections 137(2) and 140(3) of the BNS. The petitioner asserted that he was never named in the FIR, that his name only surfaced during investigation, and that the victim’s statement under Section 183 of the BNSS does not accuse him of any sexual offence. He highlighted his clean antecedent and noted that a co‑accused had already been granted anticipatory bail in a similar case. The State opposed the relief. The Court, after considering the material, held that the petitioner had made out a prima facie case for anticipatory bail and directed the District Court to release him on bail if arrested or surrendered within four weeks, subject to a bond and sureties, and to verify his criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code in view of the allegations under Sections 137(2) and 140(3) of the BNS.
- Whether the absence of the petitioner’s name in the FIR and lack of any allegation in the victim’s statement constitute sufficient grounds for granting anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 137(2), 140(3)
- BNSS — s. 183, 482
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- pre‑arrest bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482
- missing minor
- sexual offence allegation
- Bihar criminal law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5763 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-118 Year-2025 Thana- MAHKAR District- Gaya
======================================================
Shankar Kumar Son of Rajesh Manjhi R/o Village - Nai Bazar, P.S. -
Mahakar, District - Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar Bihar
2. Manoj Manjhi Son of Suresh Manjhi R/o Village - Nai Bazar, P.S. -
Mahakar, District - Gaya.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Saxena, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PURNENDU SINGH
ORAL ORDER
4 06-04-2026 Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Saxena, learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Uday Pratap
Singh, learned APP appearing on behalf of the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Mahakar P.S. Case No. 118 of 2025 registered under
Sections 137(2), 140(3) of the BNS.
3. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the
informant’s minor daughter, aged about 14 years and 6 months,
went to Nai Bazar for tuition and did not return thereafter
despite search.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5763 of 2026(4) dt.06-04-2026
2/3
falsely been implicated in the present case on account of his
acquaintance with one Rohit Kumar. The petitioner was not
named in the FIR and his name has surfaced in course of
investigation. The petitioner is a labourer and he has no
connection with the alleged occurrence. In the statement of the
victim recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS she has not
alleged that the petitioner has committed any sexual wrong with
her. Other accused has already been granted anticipatory bail by
this Court vide order dated 09.10.2025 passed in Cr. Misc.
No.71221 of 2025. The petitioner has clean antecedent. On
these grounds, the petitioner seeks to be released on pre-arrest
bail.
5. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the
prayer for grant of pre-arrest bail.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made on behalf
of the parties, as well as, having considered the nature of
allegations made in the FIR and the materials available on
record, and taking into account that the petitioner was not
named in the FIR and his name surfaced during the course of
investigation, in her statement recorded under Section 183 of the
BNSS the victim has not alleged that the petitioner has
committed any sexual offence against her, and further
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5763 of 2026(4) dt.06-04-2026
3/3
considering that similarly situated co-accused has already been
granted anticipatory bail by this Court, I am of the opinion that
the petitioner has, prima facie, made out a case to be released on
anticipatory bail.
7. The learned District Court is directed to release the
petitioner on anticipatory bail, in the event of his/her arrest or
surrender before the learned District Court within a period of
four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the
satisfaction of learned District Court where the case is pending
in connection with Mahakar P.S. Case No. 118 of 2025, subject
to the condition as laid down under Section 482 of the
BNSS//438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
8. The learned District Court is directed to verify
the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, as stated in
paragraph no. 3 of the bail application. If any other case is
pending against the petitioner, as what has been stated in
paragraph no. 3, this order will lose its force automatically.
(Purnendu Singh, J)
Ashishsingh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.