Partly allowed

Munshi Mandal v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC16 Sept 2026A.B.A./4264/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge granted anticipatory bail to ten petitioners but rejected it for one petitioner (No. 6) specifically accused of assault in a criminal case arising from a civil land dispute, directing surrenders to the lower court.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to petitioners 1-5 and 7-11; rejected for petitioner 6; directed to surrender to JMFC Giridih within three weeks.

Munshi Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2026)

¶1

2026:JHHC:27964

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

¶3

----

¶4

A.B.A. No. 4264 of 2026

¶5

----

¶6

1 .Munshi Mandal, aged about 70 years, son of late Sona Mandal

¶7

2 .Ashok Mandal, aged about 37 years, son of Basudev Mandal

¶8

3 .Nasruddin Ansari, aged about 32 years, son of Hakim Ansari

¶9

4 .Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Mandal, aged about 21 years, son of Khublal Mandal

¶10

5 .Ramu Kumar @ Ramu Mandal, aged about 27 years, son of late Dashrath Mandal

¶11

6.Pawan Kumar Mandal, aged about 23 years, son of Dashrath Mandal

¶12

7 .Sandeep Mandal, aged about 28 years, son of Baleshwar Mandal

¶13

8 .Ram Prasad Mandal @ Bholu Mandal, aged about 42 years, son of Bandhan Mandal

¶14

9 .Munna Mandal, aged about 21 years, son of Devan Mandal 10 .Tulsi Mandal, aged about 45 years, son of Ishvar Mandal

¶15

11 .Ganesh Mandal, aged about 32 years, son of Ishvar Mandal All are residents of Village Jangidiri, PO Chalimon Barmasiya,

¶16

PS Dumri, District Giridih, Jharkhand .... Petitioners

¶17

-- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party

¶18

¶19

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶20

¶21

For the Petitioners :- Mr. Mritunjay Choudhary , Advocate

¶22

¶23

2026:JHHC:27964

¶24

For the State :- Ms Bandana Sinha, Advocate For the Informant :- Mr. Afaque Ahmed, Advocate ----

¶25

/16.09.2026 Heard learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners and for the respondent-State as well as the informant.

¶26

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Dumri P.S. Case No.119 of 2025, for offence registered under section 191(2), 191(3), 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 76, 303(2) of B.N.S., 2023, pending in court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Giridih.

¶27

Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and there is land dispute and for that the altercation took place. He also submits that the allegations of outraging modesty is also not correct and in view of that the same has not come in the Supervision Note which is part of the case-diary. He next submits that so far as one case against the petitioner nos.1, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 11 are concerned, it relates to the same land and the same was also filed by the petitioner no.1. He also submits that the land is belonging to the petitioners and there is an order of the L.R.D.C, and on these grounds, he submits that the anticipatory bail may kindly be granted.

¶28

Learned State counsel as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant jointly oppose the prayer and submit that serious allegations are there against the petitioners and

¶29

¶30

2026:JHHC:27964

¶31

due to which, a person aged about 60 years, has received grievous injury and on these grounds, they submit that prayer for anticipatory bail may kindly be rejected.

¶32

On query made by the Court, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State fairly submits that the allegations are made against 63 accused persons and in paragraph nos.35 to 37 of the case-diary, the witnesses have stated that assault has been made by the petitioners and one another person. 6. On perusal of the FIR, it transpires that the allegations are made against 63 persons of assault and in paragraph no.35 of the case-diary, the witness has stated that the case is of civil in nature and one case is pending before the S.D.M., Dumri under section 145 of the Cr.PC and in paragraph no.36 of the case-diary, independent witness has also stated about the same. However, the allegations are made of assault and it further transpires that the allegation of assault is there against the petitioner no.6, and in that view of the matter, the prayer for anticipatory bail with respect to petitioner no.6 is, hereby, rejected.

¶33

So far as petitioner nos.1 to 5 and 7 to 11 are concerned, there are general and omnibus allegations against them and that allegation is also made against 63 persons and the witnesses have stated about the dispute of civil in nature, and in the attending facts and circumstances of the instant case, I am inclined to grant

¶34

¶35

2026:JHHC:27964

¶36

anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos.1 to 5 and 7 to 11.

¶37

Accordingly, petitioner nos.1 to 5 and 7 to 11, above named, are hereby directed to surrender before learned court within three weeks from today, and in event of their surrender/arrest, petitioner nos.1 to 5 and 7 to 11, above named, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each, with two sureties of like amount each, to satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Giridih, in connection with Dumri P.S. Case No.119 of 2025, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 482(2) of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023.

¶38

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶39

16.09.2026 SI/

¶40

Munshi Mandal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munshi Mandal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases