Patna High Court
Manjit Kumar ThakurversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail should be granted, subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
Summary
Manjit Kumar Thakur applied for anticipatory bail in a criminal case registered under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the B.N.S., alleging that the alleged victim’s statements were contradictory and made under parental pressure, and that a cover notice had been validly served on the second opposite party. The petitioner asserted a clean antecedent and argued that the victim had voluntarily taken valuables and eloped, indicating lack of culpability. The State opposed the bail, contending that the offences were serious and the petitioner might abscond. The Court examined the service of notice, the credibility of the victim’s statements, and the petitioner’s background, and concluded that bail could be granted with conditions. Accordingly, the Court ordered release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S., and directed surrender within six weeks if arrested.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail is appropriate in a case under Sections 137(2) and 96 of the B.N.S.
- Whether the cover notice served on the second opposite party is valid and sufficient to stay proceedings.
- Whether the victim’s inconsistent statements, allegedly made under pressure, affect the necessity of bail.
- Whether the petitioner is likely to abscond or tamper with evidence.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 137(2), 180, 183, 482(2), 96
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- B.N.S. Sections 137(2) and 96
- cover notice
- victim statements
- clean antecedent
- Section 482(2) inherent powers
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76040 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2025 Thana- NAUHATTA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Manjit Kumar Thakur Son of Raju Thakur Resident of Village- Bishunpur,
Police Station- Nauhatta, District- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Usha Devi W/o- Ram Pravesh Chandel, R/o- Bishunpur, P.S.- Nauhatta,
District- Rohtas
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Kumar Mishra
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 10-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his
arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 137(2) and 96 of the B.N.S.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that from perusal of the office report dated 19.03.2026, it
would manifest that registered cover notice has been
received by opposite party no.2.
4. Since registered cover notice has been received
by opposite party no.2, hence the notice is deemed to be
validly served. It is next submitted that opposite party no.2,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76040 of 2025(3) dt.10-04-2026
2/4
despite receiving notice, chooses not to appear and contest.
It is also submitted that even case diary was called for but
the same also till date has not been received.
5. It is further submitted that petitioner is a person
with clean antecedent and from perusal of the allegations as
alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that allegation is of
enticing the minor daughter of the informant by the
petitioner and his brother Rajesh. It is next submitted that
from perusal of the allegations as alleged in the FIR, it
would manifest that the victim while fleeing from the house
took away golden chain, earring and Rs.20,000/- which
amply demonstrates that the victim on her own volition left
the house. It is also submitted that victim came back and her
statement was recorded under Section 180 BNSS wherein
she has not supported the case of the prosecution, nor
alleged anything against the petitioner, but when her
statement was again recorded under Section 180 BNSS, the
victim supported the case of the prosecution. Similarly the
victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS
has not supported the case of the prosecution, but
subsequently, one statement was again recorded under
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76040 of 2025(3) dt.10-04-2026
3/4
Section 183 of the BNSS, she supported the case of the
prosecution. It is next submitted that from the narration of
facts as recorded herein above, it would manifest that when
statement of the victim was recorded under parental
pressure, she supported the prosecution case and when the
statement was recorded without any coercion she did not
support the case of the prosecution. It is further submitted
that even allegations in the FIR points to the fact that the
victim had eloped with the petitioner or else she would not
have taken golden chain, earring and cash while eloping. It
is further submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather
will cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
6. Learned A.P.P. opposes the anticipatory bail
application.
7. Considering the submissions made by the
learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner, above-
named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the
learned Court below within a period of six weeks, is
directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-bonds
in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76040 of 2025(3) dt.10-04-2026
4/4
learned Trial Court where the case is pending/successor
Court in connection with Nauhatta P. S. Case No.160 of
2025, subject to the conditions laid down under Section
482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…