Patna High Court
Ajay Majhi @ Ajay ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner, finding the circumstances warranted continued custody.
Summary
Ajay Majhi was arrested on 8 November 2024 in connection with FIR No. 37 of 2020 alleging offences under Sections 363, 366(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, including allegations of rape supported by a victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C and medical evidence. The petitioner sought bail, arguing a clean antecedent and that a co‑accused, Vishwanath Pandit, had been granted bail in a similar case. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges, the victim’s corroborated testimony, and the presence of medical proof of sexual assault. The trial court report indicated that only three of nine charge‑sheet witnesses had been examined, with the trial still pending. Considering the nature of the allegations, the medical evidence, and the incomplete trial, the High Court refused bail and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case involving alleged rape, theft and kidnapping with supporting medical evidence and pending trial.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 366
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- rape
- theft
- kidnapping
- medical evidence
- criminal procedure
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8584 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-37 Year-2020 Thana- SANGRAMPUR District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Ajay Majhi @ Ajay Manjhi Son of Sukhal Manjhi @ Sukhal Majhi Resident
of village - Mushahari Tola Mangalapur, P.S.- Sangrampur, District - East
Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nagina Prasad Kushwaha Son of Pajha Prasad Resident of village - Dekahan
Bhawanipur, P.S.- Sangrampur, District - East Champaran.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Ray, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 10-04-2026 Heard Mr. Hemant Ray, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Raj Kishor Singh, learned A.P.P. for the
State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
08.11.2024 in connection with Sangrampur P.S. Case No. 37 of
2020, FIR dated 19.02.2020 registered for the offence under
Section 363, 366(A), 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected vide order dated 20.06.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 27433 of
2025.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8584 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026
2/3
falsely been implicated in this case and similarly situated co-
accused person, namely, Vishwanath Pandit has been granted
the privilege of bail by this Court vide order dated 26.04.2022
in Cr. Misc. No. 62187 of 2021 and the petitioner is rotting in
judicial custody since 08.11.2024. He further submits that
charge has been framed against the petitioner on 15.07.2025 and
trial has not been concluded as yet.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and
submits that from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that victim
has supported the case of the prosecution in her statement
recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C/183 of BNSS and stated that
petitioner has committed rape upon her and medical report of
the victim also suggest that she has been sexually assaulted by
the petitioner and other co-accused persons.
6. Vide order dated 25.02.2026 a report was called
with regard to stage of the trial. Report of the learned Trial
Court dated 04.04.2026 reveals that out of nine charge sheet
witnesses, only three witnesses have been examined and the
case is pending for examination of rest six witnesses.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case as well as report of Trial Court and nature of allegation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8584 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026
3/3
supported by medical evidence, I am not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail in connection with Sangrampur P.S. Case No.
37 of 2020, pending in the Court of District & Additional
Sessions Judge-1, East Champaran, Motihari.
8. Prayer is refused.
9. However the learned Trial Court is directed to
expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…