Patna High Court
Vinod ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners subject to bond, surety and compliance conditions under Section 482(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioners, six members of the Manjhi family, sought anticipatory bail after being implicated in an FIR alleging assault on an informant on 1 August 2025. They argued they have clean antecedents and that the FIR is vague, with inconsistencies regarding the informant’s statement and the timeline of his unconsciousness. The State opposed the bail, contending the seriousness of the offences listed under the B.N.S. The Court examined the allegations, noted the lack of specific details in the FIR, and considered the petitioners’ willingness to cooperate. It granted anticipatory bail conditioned on a Rs.10,000 bond per petitioner, two sureties, and compliance with Section 482(2) of the CrPC. The order also warned that bail could be cancelled if the investigating officer shows non‑cooperation by the petitioners.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners accused under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
- Whether the FIR and the informant’s statements establish a prima facie case justifying denial of bail
- Whether the petitioners are likely to cooperate with the investigation
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 109(1), 115(2), 117(2), 126(2), 303(2), 3(5), 351(2), 352
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- FIR
- false implication
- assault
- Section 482
- Criminal Procedure Code
- bail conditions
- investigation cooperation
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86091 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-595 Year-2025 Thana- BODHGAYA District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Vinod Manjhi S/o- Nathun Manjhi R/v- Kachanpur (Kehari) Ps- Bodhgaya
Dist- Gaya
2. Pramod Manjhi S/o- Nathun Manjhi R/v- Kachanpur (Kehari) Ps- Bodhgaya
Dist- Gaya
3. Jitendra Manjhi S/o- Nathun Manjhi R/v- Kachanpur (Kehari) Ps- Bodhgaya
Dist- Gaya
4. Eshwar Manjhi @ Kishor Kumar S/o- Vinod Manjhi R/v- Kachanpur
(Kehari) Ps- Bodhgaya Dist- Gaya
5. Surendra Manjhi S/o- Suresh Manjhi R/v- Kachanpur (Kehari) Ps-
Bodhgaya Dist- Gaya
6. Maniye Manjhi S/o- Visheswar Manjhi R/v- Kachanpur (Kehari) Ps-
Bodhgaya Dist- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 15-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2),
115(2), 117(2), 109(1), 303(2), 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the
B.N.S.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
petitioners are persons with clean antecedent and the informant
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86091 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
2/4
alleges that on 01.08.2025 at 10 P.M. while returning from
work, he went to meet his friend Vinod, when other named
accused persons including the petitioners came and abused him
asking why he has come to the house of Vinod, thereafter Vinor,
Pramod, Ishwar and Maniya with rod and Jeetendra and
Surendra with lathi assaulted him causing injury on head, leg
and hand along with swelling on chest, thereafter they also tied
his leg and hand, further 5-7 unknown accused including
women also assaulted him, it is next alleged that on account of
assault, the informant became unconscious and the next day his
family members along with police came searching and was
admitted in hospital in an unconscious state.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioners submits that petitioners have been falsely implicated
in the instant case by the informant. It is next submitted that
from perusal of the allegation as alleged in the FIR, it would
manifest that informant alleges that he had come to the house of
Vinod who meet him, where other named accused persons
including the petitioners came and asked him why he has come
and thereafter assaulted him but then it is submitted that the
allegation does not even remotely discloses the reason of the
occurrence. It is also submitted that though it is alleged that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86091 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
3/4
informant was assaulted by the accused persons leading to an
unconscious and thereafter he was admitted in the hospital but
then the place from where the informant was recovered and
taken to the hospital is also not recorded in the FIR. It is further
submitted that the date of occurrence is 01.08.2025 and the
fardbeyan of the informant was recorded on 05.08.2025 and
thereafter the FIR came to be instituted on 17.08.2025. It is
submitted that it absolutely does not stand to reason that as to
why the fardbeyan of the informant was recorded after four days
of the occurrence, when it is alleged in the FIR that the police
and his family members recovered him in an unconscious state
and was admitted in a hospital but then the FIR also does not
disclose that informant remained unconscious for four days. It is
next submitted that it is not the case of the informant that
accused persons came and assaulted him rather it is being
alleged that he came to the house of Vinod, where other accused
persons were also present and they assaulted him but then
allegation of assault is also not specific. It is next submitted that
the allegation as alleged in the FIR is not inspiring confidence
more-so when petitioners are persons with clean antecedent. It is
next submitted that petitioners will not abscond rather will
cooperate in the investigation to prove their innocence.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86091 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026
4/4
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
anticipatory bail of the petitioners.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners above-named, in the
event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below
within a period of six weeks from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned trial court where the
case is pending/successor court in connection with Bodhgaya
P.S. Case No.595/2025, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
7. However, it is made clear that in the event if the
Investigating Officer of the case files an application before the
learned trial court bringing to its notice that the petitioners
despite giving assurance to this court are not co-operating in the
investigation in that event the learned trial court shall be at
liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…