Patna High Court

MANOJ PATHAK @ MANOJ KUMAR PATHAKversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 23 February 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: PARTHA SARTHY

Holding

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, directing release upon furnishing a bond with sureties.

Summary

Manoj Pathak applied for regular bail in a case registered under sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, alleging that the FIR’s informant was not an eyewitness and that the petitioner was not named in the brother’s statement. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner was among seven accused who fired at the informant’s son. The petitioner had been in custody since 21 July 2025, had no prior criminal record, and the charge sheet had already been filed. The court noted that the allegations in the FIR were general, the petitioner was not identified in the brother’s statement, and he had been detained for over six months. Accordingly, the court ordered his release on bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner, not being named in the key witness statement, is entitled to regular bail under the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
Whether the general and omnibus nature of the FIR allegations justifies bail despite the seriousness of the offence.

Legislation cited

Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)

Subjects

regular bail
Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita
omnibus FIR
no criminal antecedent
charge sheet

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87880 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-176 Year-2025 Thana- BAJPATTI District- Sitamarhi
                 ======================================================
                 MANOJ PATHAK @ MANOJ KUMAR PATHAK Son of Late Harischandra
                 Pathak @ Kamlakant Pathak Resident of Village - Malahi, P.S.- Sursand,
                 District - Sitamarhi

                                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Vikash Kumar Jha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Surendra Kumar, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   23-02-2026                    1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                   2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Bajpatti P.S. Case no. 176

                   of 2025       registered under sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the

                   Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states

                   that the seven named accused persons including the petitioner

                   herein, as also 4 to 5 unknown persons resorted to firing, killing

                   the son of the informant.

                                4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   from perusal of the FIR it would transpire that the informant is

                   not an eyewitness to the occurrence. Her statement is recorded

                   in paragraph no. 9 of the case diary wherein she states that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87880 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
                                            2/3




          having received information from her brother whose statement

          has been recorded by the police in paragraph no. 11 of the case

          diary. The informant’s brother claims to have been told by the

          deceased before his death about the accused persons having

          killed him, however, learned counsel submits that the petitioner

          is not named in the statement by the brother of the informant as

          recorded in paragraph no. 11 of the case diary. The petitioner is

          in custody since 21.7.2025 and has no criminal antecedent.

                          5. The application for bail is opposed by learned

          APP for the State. However, it is not denied that in his statement

          recorded in paragraph no. 11 of the case diary the brother of the

          informant has not named the petitioner herein.

                       6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

          taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in

          the FIR being general and omnibus in nature and especially the

          petitioner not having been named by the brother of the

          informant in his statement recorded in paragraph no. 11 of the

          case diary together with the petitioner having remained in

          custody for over 6 months since 21.7.2025, not having any

          criminal antecedent and charge sheet having been submitted in

          the case, the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in

          connection with Bajpatti P.S. Case no. 176 of 2025 on furnishing bail
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87880 of 2025(3) dt.23-02-2026
                                                        3/3




                      bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the

                      like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial

                      Magistrate 1st Pupri, Sitamarhi.



                                                  (Partha Sarthy, J)
Bibhash/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…