Patna High Court
Manu Rai @ Manu Kumar Rai @ Monu RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court denied regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Manu Rai applied for regular bail in a case registered under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code for alleged armed robbery. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with another accused, stopped a man with a pistol and looted cash and valuables. The petitioner contended that the FIR was lodged against unknown persons and that he was falsely implicated, noting the absence of any incriminating article in his possession and that he had not been produced for a T.I. parade despite being in custody. The State opposed bail, highlighting the petitioner’s twenty prior criminal convictions. After considering the seriousness of the offence, the investigation’s material, and the petitioner’s antecedents, the Court refused bail, allowing the petitioner to renew the application after six months.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail under Section 392 IPC given the nature of the alleged offence and his criminal antecedents
- Whether the lack of incriminating material and non-production for a T.I. parade justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 392
Subjects
- regular bail
- Section 392 IPC
- armed robbery
- criminal antecedents
- Patna High Court
- false implication
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74528 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-122 Year-2018 Thana- GARKHA District- Saran
======================================================
Manu Rai @ Manu Kumar Rai @ Monu Rai S/o Raju Rai @ Raju Kumar R/o
village - Chhota Telpa, Goria Toli, P.S.- Chapra Town, Dist.- Saran at Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Maheshwar Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant
of regular bail in connection with Garkha P.S. Case no.122 of
2018 registered under section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that
while he was returning home after having collected money with
respect to non-banking finance company, it is stated that two
accused persons on the point of a pistol stopped him and looted
him of Rs.93,752/ in cash, mobile phone, laptop etc. and fled
away.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
FIR was registered against two unknown. The petitioner was
falsely implicated in the case only on the basis of the
confessional statement of the petitioner himself made before
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74528 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/2
police. No incriminating article has been recovered from the
petitioner’s possession. He has not been put on T.I. parade
inspite of being in custody since 16.6.2025 and chargesheet has
been submitted in the case.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P.
for the State who submits that the petitioner has as many as 20
criminal antecedents.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegation in the FIR, the material
that has transpired in course of investigation and specially the
antecedents of the petitioner, the Court is not inclined to enlarge
the petitioner on bail for the present and the application is
rejected.
7. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his
prayer for bail after six months.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Saurabh/-
U
Checking your session…