Patna High Court
Raju Kumar ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 438(2) of the CrPC.
Summary
The petitioner, Raju Kumar Manjhi, was implicated in a kidnapping (Sec. 363 IPC) and criminal intimidation (Sec. 366 IPC) case based on an FIR filed on 1 June 2022 concerning an alleged incident on 4 November 2021. He contended that he has a clean record, the allegation was false, and the FIR was lodged after an unreasonable six‑month delay, with the victim’s statement recorded under Section 164 CrPC being made under parental pressure. The State opposed his anticipatory bail, but could not refute the delay or the claim of false implication. The Court considered the submissions, the delay, and the absence of any Section 82/83 CrPC process, and decided to grant anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties and conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC. The order directs the petitioner to cooperate with the investigation and comply with the stipulated conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted in a kidnapping and criminal intimidation case where the FIR was filed after a six‑month delay.
- Whether the alleged false implication and the victim’s pressured statement justify granting bail.
- Whether the conditions prescribed under Section 438(2) CrPC are satisfied.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164, 438(2), 82, 83
- Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- kidnapping
- criminal intimidation
- FIR delay
- false implication
- Section 438
- bail conditions
- Indian Penal Code
- Criminal Procedure Code
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86115 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2022 Thana- RASULPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Raju Kumar Manjhi S/o- Vishram Manjhi Village - Chanchaura Bar Tola , P.S
- Rasulpur, District - Saran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hemant Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Gulnar Begum
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-01-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case
registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366
of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant
alleges that her daughter was married to Avinash in the year
2021, after marriage, her daughter had come to her parental
home, when on 04.11.2021 the petitioner along with Rakesh
came and took her daughter on the pretext that someone was
calling her, but her daughter did not return,.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has been falsely implicated in the instant case by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86115 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
informant. It is next submitted that the petitioner and the victim
were known to each other. It is also submitted that they both
worked in orchestra but then the informant concealing the said
fact had performed her marriage with Avinash but the victim
came back and accompanied the petitioner to the orchestra
where they were working from before. It is further submitted
that victim had come back and her statement has been recorded
under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has supported the case of
the prosecution and has stated that petitioner has sold her for Rs.
1 lakh in an orchestra but then the said statement has been made
only to implicate the petitioner under parental pressure. It is
further submitted that from perusal of the allegation as alleged
in the FIR, it would manifest that the date of occurrence is
04.11.2021 and the FIR came to be instituted on 01.06.2022 i.e.
nearly a delay of six months, which casts an aspersion on the
case of the prosecution. It is also submitted that till date no
process under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued. It is
further submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will
cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State Ms. Gulnar Begum
opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but then
is not in a position to rebut the submission of the learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86115 of 2025(2) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that FIR was
instituted after a delay of nearly six months.
6. 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 from today, be released on
anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/-
(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where
the case is pending/successor court in connection with Rasulpur
P.S. Case No.142/2022, subject to the conditions as laid down
under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.