Patna High Court
Sarjun ManjhiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- PARTLY ALLOWED (DISPOSAL)
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted anticipatory bail to Suraj Manjhi and denied anticipatory bail to Sarjun Manjhi.
Summary
Petitioners Sarjun and Suraj Manjhi applied for anticipatory bail fearing arrest in an arms case (Sections 25(1‑b)(i), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act) where co‑accused claimed the weapons were obtained from them. The State opposed bail, highlighting that Sarjun has five prior criminal cases and Suraj has one. The petitioners argued they were innocent, no weapon was recovered from them and only the co‑accused’s statement implicated them. The Patna High Court, after hearing counsel, granted anticipatory bail to Suraj Manjhi subject to surrender, a bail bond of Rs 10,000 and two sureties, while rejecting Sarjun’s anticipatory bail due to his extensive criminal antecedents. Sarjun was directed to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail there.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under the circumstances of the arms case
- Whether the criminal antecedents of the petitioners justify denial of anticipatory bail
Legislation cited
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Arms Act
- criminal antecedent
- Section 438 CrPC
- Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
- bail conditions
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91870 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-630 Year-2025 Thana- WAJIRGANJ District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Sarjun Manjhi S/O Rameshwar Manjhi Resident of Vill.- Basua Tand, P.S-
Bazir Ganj Dist.- Gaya
2. Suraj Manjhi S/O Sarjun Manjhi Resident of Vill.- Basua Tand, P.S- Bazir
Ganj Dist.- Gaya
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. The instant application for anticipatory bail has
been filed by the petitioners apprehending their arrest in
connection with Wazir Ganj P.S. Case No. 630 of 2025
instituted for the offence under Sections 25(1-b)(i), 26 and 35 of
the Arms Act.
3. The case of the prosecution is that some arms were
recovered from the possession of Pramod Kumar and Urmila
Devi. On being asked, they disclosed that they have obtained
these from these petitioners.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91870 of 2025(2) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have
committed no offence. They have falsely been implicated in this
case. Save and except the statement of the co-accused, there is
nothing against the petitioners and also nothing has been
recovered from their possession.
5. In contra, learned APP appearing for the State has
opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioners and has submitted
that petitioner no. 1 is having criminal antecedent of five cases
whereas petitioner no. 2 is having criminal antecedent of one
case.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in
the facts and circumstances of the case as stated above, this
Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner no. 2, namely, Suraj
Manjhi on bail. The petitioner no. 2 is directed to surrender in
the Court below within a period of four weeks from today and in
the event of his arrest or surrender in connection with Wazir
Ganj P.S. Case No. 630 of 2025, he will be enlarged 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 J.M. 1st Class, Gaya subject to the conditions as laid
down under section 482(2) of B.N.S.S.
7. So far as petitioner no. 1, namely, Sarjun Manjhi is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91870 of 2025(2) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
concerned, he is having criminal antecedent of five cases, as
such, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory
bail. Hence, his prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.
8. However, the petitioner no. 1 is directed to
surrender before the learned trial Court and pray for regular bail
and the same shall be considered by the learned trial Court on its
own merit without being prejudiced by this order.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Shubham/-
U T
Checking your session…