Patna High Court
Manu Kumar @ Abhimanyu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Anticipatory bail was not granted to the petitioner.
Summary
Manu Kumar petitioned for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a robbery case (Section 392 IPC) where he alleges he was falsely implicated. The FIR named unknown persons; his name surfaced only from a co-accused’s confessional statement in a separate case. He claims innocence and points to his lack of involvement, while the State opposes bail citing his two prior criminal antecedents of a similar nature. The Patna High Court, after considering the seriousness of the offence and the petitioner’s criminal record, declined to grant anticipatory bail. The court, however, allowed the petitioner to surrender within six weeks and seek regular bail, which would be decided on its merits.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner under the circumstances of the robbery case and his criminal antecedents.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 392
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- robbery
- IPC Section 392
- criminal antecedent
- bail jurisdiction
- Patna High Court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7483 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-474 Year-2023 Thana- MASHRAK District- Saran
======================================================
Manu Kumar @ Abhimanyu Kumar S/O late Suresh Prasad R/o Village
Gamhriya, P.s.- Baikuntpur, District- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Avinash Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Surendra Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 04-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection
with Mashrak P.S. Case No. 474 of 2023 instituted for the
offences under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, informant was accosted
with four unknown miscreants while he was on his way and on
gun point, they looted cash to the tune of Rs. 1,10,000/-, bag
and motorcycle from the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and the same
has been lodged against unknown persons. The name of the
petitioner has come into light on the basis of confessional
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7483 of 2026(2) dt.04-02-2026
2/2
statement of co-accused Bittu Kumar, who has been interrogated
in the another case. The petitioner has got no concern with the
alleged occurrence. It has been submitted on behalf of the
petitioner that the petitioner has two criminal antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, taking into consideration the criminal antecedents of
similar nature, in my view, this is not a fit case for anticipatory
bail, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory
bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
8. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the
learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and
prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own
merit without being prejudiced by this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…