Patna High Court
Samdeo Manjhi @ Shyamdeo ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
Bail was granted to the petitioner on the condition of a bond and compliance with specified conditions.
Summary
Samdeo Manjhi was arrested on 20 July 2025 in connection with a FIR dated 19 July 2025 alleging multiple offences under the B.N.S., including assault, kidnapping and robbery. The prosecution alleged that the accused entered the complainant’s house, assaulted family members, threw the father‑in‑law from the roof and stole valuables. The petitioner contended that he has a clean antecedent and that the FIR contains only a generic allegation against all accused, with no specific act attributed to him. The State opposed bail, while the petitioner’s counsel highlighted that a co‑accused, Sugiya Devi, had already been granted bail in a similar case. The Court, noting the lack of specific allegation against the petitioner and his clean record, granted bail subject to a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties, and conditions regarding cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the offences alleged.
- Whether the absence of a specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR justifies bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s clean antecedent and the grant of bail to a similarly situated co‑accused influence the bail decision.
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- clean antecedent
- specific allegation
- co‑accused
- conditions of bail
- section 191
- section 190
- section 126
- section 115
- section 109
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87400 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-161 Year-2025 Thana- TANKUPPA District- Gaya
======================================================
Samdeo Manjhi @ Shyamdeo Manjhi S/o Dallu Manjhi R/o Village- Bardiha
Tola, Dukhi Bigha, P.S- Tankuppa, Dist- Gaya Ji.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Anil Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 Heard Mr. Pushp Raj Singh, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Anil Kumar, learned APP for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
20.07.2025, in connection with Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 161 of
2025, F.I.R. dated 19.07.2025 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 191(2), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 109,
140(1), 137(2), 303(2), 152, 351(2) of the B.N.S.
3. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged
that when she and her family members were sleeping in her house,
in the meantime, petitioner along with other co-accused persons
entered her house and began assaulting her family members and
threw her father-in-law from roof and also took him away. It is
further alleged that the accused persons took away household
articles and snatched golden locket from the neck of the informant.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87400 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated
in the present case. Although, the petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
but from perusal of the F.I.R. it appears that there is no specific
allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against the
petitioner rather there is general and omnibus allegation against all
the accused persons including the petitioner and the co-accused
person namely Sugiya Devi @ Sunaina Devi against whom the
similar allegation has been granted bail by this Court vide order
dated 15.01.2026 in Cr. Misc. No. 86948 of 2025. He further
submits that the police after investigation submitted chargesheet
against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody since
20.07.2025.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
and the fact that the petitioner having clean antecedent and there is
no specific allegation of any assault or overt act attributed against
him in the F.I.R. and similarly situated co-accused person has been
granted bail by this Court, let the petitioner, above named, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees
Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. IV, Gaya in connection with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87400 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 161 of 2025, subject to the following
conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on
his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his
bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for
cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any
stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail
bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for
purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…