Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Sukhlal ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner, subject to a bond and sureties, under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.

Summary

The petitioner, Sukhlal Manjhi, was implicated in a 2004 kidnapping and ransom case under Sections 365 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, alleged to have abducted the minor daughter of the complainant and demanded Rs.50,000. He contended that he was falsely implicated, asserting that he is married to the victim, has no criminal antecedent, and was unaware of the alleged crime. The State opposed his bail application, while the petitioner’s counsel argued for his innocence and clean record. The court, after considering the nature of the allegations, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, and the submissions of both sides, ordered that the petitioner be released on bail if arrested or surrendered within six weeks, upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. The order reflects the court’s discretion to grant bail in view of the petitioner’s circumstances and the statutory provisions.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate exercise of judicial discretion in granting bail to a petitioner accused under Sections 365 and 34 of the IPC?
  • Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and claim of false implication justify bail despite the seriousness of the kidnapping allegation.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • kidnapping
  • IPC
  • Section 365
  • Section 34
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
  • false implication
  • criminal procedure

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6343 of 2026
                  Arising Out of PS. Case No.-725 Year-2004 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE District-
                                                          Gaya
                 ======================================================
                 Sukhlal Manjhi S/O Butai Manjhi R/O Village- Pir Bigha, Police Station-
                 Belaganj, District- Gaya.

                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    Krishna Chaudhary S/O Late Raju Chaudhary R/O Village- Pir Bigha, P.S-
                 Belaganj, Distt.- Gaya.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr. Aryan Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   01-04-2026                           Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                     2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered under Sections 365 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

                                   3. It is alleged that, petitioner and other co-accused

                   persons kidnapped the minor daughter of the complainant/O.P.

                   No. 2 and also demanded ransom of Rs.50,000/-                     from the

                   complainant.

                                   4.    Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

                   petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely

                   been implicated in the present case due to oblique reason.

                   Further submission is that victim and the petitioner have
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6343 of 2026(4) dt.01-04-2026
                                                        2/2




                      solemnized marriage and both are living happily as husband and

                      wife. Petitioner had no knowledge about the present case.

                      Petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and he undertakes to

                      cooperate in the trial.

                                    5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer for

                      bail.

                                   6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of

                      the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature

                      of allegation and clean antecedent of the petitioner, let the above

                      named petitioner be released on bail, in the event of arrest or

                      surrender before the learned court below within a period of six

                      weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-

                      (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                      each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Gaya in

                      connection with Complaint Case No. 725 of 2004, subject to the

                      conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya

                      Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.



                                              (Sunil Dutta Mishra, J)
utkarsh/-

U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.