Pappu Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29244 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2022 Thana- PARSA District- Saran

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Pappu Manjhi S/O Jawahar Manjhi R/O Village- Sikti, P.S- Parsa, Distt.Saran at Chapra.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Bharat Lal, APP ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA ORAL ORDER

¶10

5 17-09-2025

¶11

Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

¶12

petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

The accused/petitioner seeks bail in connection

¶14

with Parsa P.S. Case No. 19 of 2022 registered for the offences under Sections 392, 411, 399, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

The accused/petitioner is not named in the First

¶16

Information Report and is in custody since 11.11.2023.

¶17

As per FIR, some unknown miscreants wearing

¶18

red and yellow jacket looted the informant and while committing so, taken away one bag containing cash of Rs.

¶19

Two Lakhs, which was collected from CSP Centre, by the informant.

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29244 of 2025(5) dt.17-09-2025 2/4

¶21

It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that name of petitioner transpired during investigation on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Bhulan Kumar Manjhi, in furtherance of which no incriminating material recovered/surfaced during investigation as to connect the petitioner prima facie with the present occurrence of robbery.

¶22

It is pointed out that petitioner was not put on TIP as yet, despite the claim of the informant that he can identify the miscreants. Arguing further, it is submitted that the sole reason for rejecting the prayer of bail of petitioner by the learned trial court is the criminal antecedent of the petitioner as he found involved in 23 more criminal cases, where in maximum of cases, he is on bail, where his name transpired on the basis of confessional statement as of the present case, having otherwise no evidentiary value in the eye of law.

¶23

It is submitted that if the merit of the case is otherwise appears favourable to the petitioner, merely on the basis of confessional statement, prayer of bail ordinarily should not be denied to the petitioner. In support of his

¶24

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29244 of 2025(5) dt.17-09-2025 3/4

¶25

submission, learned counsel relied upon the legal report of Hon’ble Supreme Court as available through Prabhakar

¶26

Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and Another reported in (2020) 11 SCC 648 .

¶27

While concluding argument, it is submitted that

¶28

investigation of this case is already completed, where chargesheet has been submitted and as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.

¶29

Learned A.P.P. for the State, while opposing the prayer for bail of the petitioner, could not disputed the aforesaid factual submission as advanced by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶30

In view of aforesaid factual submission and by

¶31

taking note of the fact as save and except suspicion arising out of confessional statement of co-accused and criminal antecedents of the petitioner, prima facie no incriminating material recovered/surfaced during investigation as to connect the petitioner with the present crime in question, coupled with the fact that petitioner remains in custody since 11.11.2023, where investigation of this case is already

¶32

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29244 of 2025(5) dt.17-09-2025 4/4

¶33

completed, accordingly, above-named petitioner is directed to be released on bail, furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra/concerned court, in connection with Parsa P.S. Case No. 19 of 2022, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 437(3) Cr.P.C/Section 480(3) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short “B.N.S.S.”).

¶34

(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J)

¶35

Rajeev/-

¶36

U T

Pappu Manjhi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu Manjhi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Singh Vs The Union of India, through the Assistant Director, Enforcement Director

Rajesh Mahato @ Rajesh Mahto Vs The Union Of India through Secretary, Ministry of Home, Narcotics Drugs Control Bureau, New Delhi

Kundan Kumar @ Kundan Sao Vs The State of Bihar

Rajendra Kumar Ragair @ Rajendra Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sajan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Shambhu Tanti Vs The State of Bihar