Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Manshu KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

Manshu Kumar applied for regular bail in a case registered under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act, alleging murder of the informant's son. The prosecution's case is based on a confessional statement of co‑accused Reeta Sinha, who has already been granted bail, and the only link to the petitioner is that he made phone calls to Reeta before and after the alleged offence. The petitioner contended that he is not named in the FIR, has no other incriminating evidence against him, and possesses a clean antecedent, having been in custody since 11‑07‑2025. The State and the informant opposed the bail. Considering the lack of substantive material, the petitioner’s clean record, and the nature of the accusation, the Court allowed the bail application, directing release upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the only evidence being phone calls and a confessional statement of a co‑accused.
  • Whether the material on record is sufficient to justify denial of bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
  • Arms Act
  • murder
  • property dispute
  • clean antecedent

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87878 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-224 Year-2025 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Manshu Kumar Son of Uday Prasad Singh @ Uday Prasad Residence of vill.-
                 Shikarpur, P.S.- Shahpur, District - Patna.
                                                                        ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                 ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rahul Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, A.P.P.
                 For the Informant        :       Ms. Shivalika Sinha, Advocate
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   11-03-2026                   Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant

                   and learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Khagaul P. S. Case No. 224 of 2025 registered for the offences

                   punishable under Sections 103(1), 61(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya

                   Nyaya Sanhita and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                3. As per prosecution case, co-accused Reeta Sinha

                   had illicit relation with the son of informant and he suspects that

                   co-accused Reeta Sinha in connivance with other accused

                   persons committed murder of his son with a view to grab his

                   property.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Petitioner

                   is not named in the F.I.R. and his name transpired on the basis
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87878 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026
                                                        2/2




                      of confessional statement of co-accused Reeta Sinha who has

                      already been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated

                      12.02.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 90031 of 2025. The only

                      material that has come against this petitioner is that he made

                      phone calls prior to and after the commission of offence to co-

                      accused Reeta Sinha and there is no other evidence on record to

                      show complicity of this petitioner in the alleged offence.

                      Petitioner claims clean antecedent and is in custody since

                      11.07.2025.

                                   5. However, learned A.P.P. for the State as well as

                      learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail

                      application.

                                   6. Considering the nature of accusation, materials

                      available on record, clean antecedent and period of custody, this

                      bail application is allowed. The petitioner, above named, is

                      directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.

                      10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

                      each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM-V, Danapur in

                      connection with Khagaul P. S. Case No. 224 of 2025.



                                            (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U       T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.