Patna High Court
Manu Singh @ Monu Singh @ Munna KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail cannot be granted as the petitioner failed to surrender after the anticipatory bail denial and his conduct has delayed the trial.
Summary
Manu Singh was charged under IPC sections 323, 341, 307, 504, 506 and 34 for allegedly assaulting an informant with a lathi‑danda and iron rods. He applied for regular bail, claiming he was falsely implicated, that no specific overt act could be attributed to him, and that he has a clean antecedent. The prosecution highlighted that an anticipatory bail plea had been rejected in 2023, that Singh subsequently absconded, did not surrender, and that his conduct has caused delay in the trial. The court observed that Singh’s failure to surrender after the earlier denial of anticipatory bail demonstrated a lack of cooperation with the process of law. Consequently, the court refused bail, noting that Singh may move again after charges are framed, and dismissed the application.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite a prior rejection of anticipatory bail and his failure to surrender.
- Whether the nature of the offences and the petitioner’s conduct justify denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 34, 341, 504, 506
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- IPC offences
- assault
- flight risk
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91962 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2022 Thana- TARARI District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Manu Singh @ Monu Singh @ Munna Kumar, S/o Satyendra Singh, R/o
village - Karath , P.s- Tarari , District - Bhojpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 11-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Tarari
P.S. Case No. 71 of 2022, dated 11.04.2022, instituted for the
offences under Sections 323, 341, 307, 504, 506 and 34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case is to the effect that the
petitioner along with two named accused persons had assaulted
the informant with lathi-danda and iron rods etc.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91962 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
2/3
he has falsely been implicated in this case with general and
omnibus allegations. It has been submitted that the petitioner
has not been attributed with any specific overt act. It has further
been submitted that there was a case and counter case for the
same offence and even the petitioner’s side have received
injuries on account of such altercation. It has lastly been
submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he is in
custody since 10.10.2025.
5. The learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State,
while vehemently opposing the prayer for bail of the petitioner,
has submitted that the case is of the year 2022 and the petitioner
had approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in the
year 2023 and the same was rejected by this Court vide order
dated 13.10.2023, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 60127 of 2023,
however, the petitioner, thereafter, absconded and did not
surrender or prefer any application before Hon’ble the Supreme
Court and, ultimately, he is in custody in the present case since
10.10.2025. It has further been submitted on behalf of the State
that on account of the petitioner, the trial of the case has also
been delayed and, therefore, he should not be released on bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions and taking
into account the fact that the petitioner, despite the fact that his
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91962 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026
3/3
anticipatory bail was rejected way-back in the year 2023, he did
not surrender to the process of law and only after two years, he
has been sent to the judicial custody, this Court is not inclined to
grant him bail for the present.
7. The prayer for grant of bail of the petitioner is,
accordingly, rejected.
8. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to move
afresh after the charges are framed.
9. With the aforesaid observations, the application
stands dismissed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Praveen-II/-
U T
Checking your session…