Patna High Court
Rama ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that the FIR contains only a general allegation against the petitioners and, therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The petitioners, four brothers from Bhawanibigha village, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case (PS Case No.136 of 2024) involving alleged assault under IPC sections 341, 323, and 308/34. The FIR alleged a collective assault on an informant during a land dispute but did not specifically charge the petitioners with any overt act. The petitioners argued that the allegations were generic and the injury was minor, while the State opposed bail, noting prior cases against some petitioners. The court examined the FIR’s lack of specific incrimination and applied Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the BNSS, 2023. It granted anticipatory bail to each petitioner on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents. The order directed that the bail be effected within thirty days of receipt.
Issues considered
- Whether the FIR contains sufficient specific allegations against the petitioners to deny anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC.
- Whether the court may grant anticipatory bail despite the existence of other pending cases against some petitioners.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Negotiable Securities Act — s. 482(2)
- Code of Criminal Procedure — s. 438(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 308/34, 323, 341
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482 BNSS
- Indian Penal Code
- assault
- land dispute
- bail conditions
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89118 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2024 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Rama Manjhi S/o- Mandan Manjhi
2. Prabhu Nath Manjhi S/o- Madan Manjhi
3. Shiv Nath Manjhi S/o- Madan Manjhi
4. Madan Manjhi @ Bhadan Manjhi S/o- Jethu Manjhi.
All R/o village- Bhawanibigha Ps- Mohanpur Dist- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Syed Mojibur Rahman, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 12-01-2026 Heard Mr.Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Mr.Syed Mojibur Rahman, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Mohanpur P.S.Case No.136 of 2024, FIR dated
18.06.2024, registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 341,323,308/34 of IPC.
3. Allegation against the petitioners is that they
alongwith other co-accused persons unanimously assaulted the
informant due to which he received head injury.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it
appears from the FIR itself that due to admitted land dispute the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89118 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
2/3
present occurrence had taken place. Although the petitioners are
named in the FIR but from a bare perusal of the FIR it appears
that there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt-act
attributed against the petitioners rather there is general and
omnibus allegation against all the accused persons including the
petitioners. Although the informant has received the injury but
the injury report of the informant suggests that the injury is
simple in nature caused by hard and blunt substance.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has
vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioners and submits that petitioner Nos. 1,3 and 4 carries one
more case other than the present one but fairly submits that the
petitioners are on bail in the said case, as mentioned in para-3 of
the bail petition. Petitioner No.2 has clean antecedent.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioners,
above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the
court below within a period of thirty days from the date of
receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.10,000 (Ten Thousand)each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M.-II, Sherghati
at Gaya in connection with Mohanpur P.S.Case No.136 of 2024,
subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89118 of 2025(2) dt.12-01-2026
3/3
the Code of Criminal Procedure/Section 482(2) of BNSS,2023
and with other following conditions:-
(I) Petitioners 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 their absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, their bail bonds shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(II) If the petitioners tamper with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(III) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioners and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioners have concealed their
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioners. 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)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…