Pramod Kumar Manjhi Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44214 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2025 Thana- KHAIRA District- Saran

¶3

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

¶4

Pramod Kumar Manjhi S/o Late Hira Manjhi R/o Village-Rampur Kala, P.S. Khaira District Saran at Chapra

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, Adv. For the Informant : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP. ======================================================

¶8

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶9

2 25-07-2025

¶10

Heard Mr. Avinash Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for

¶11

the Petitioner, Mr. Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, learned APP for the State.

¶12

2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025 dated 24.03.2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS.

¶13

3. The main submissions advanced by the petitioner’s counsel are that the petitioner, who is a young person, has been languishing in jail since 22.05.2025, as per the allegation, he inflicted farsa blow at the head of the informant which resulted in an injury near his right eye and nose but the said injury has been opined to be caused by hard and blunt object which does not corroborate the allegation as to using sharp edged weapon in assaulting the informant. It is further submitted that on the body of

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44214 of 2025(2) dt.25-07-2025 2/2

¶15

the informant, only two injuries were found which were opined to be simple in nature and in this regard, copy of injury report has been filed with this petition. It is lastly submitted that both the parties are agnates and the alleged occurrence is said to have taken place due to some land dispute running in between both the parties at that time.

¶16

4. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitting that there is a serious allegation against this petitioner as he used a fatal weapon to assault the informant.

¶17

5. Considering the aforesaid submissions and mainly the petitioner’s young age, his custody period and also the informant’s injuries which have been opined to be simple in nature, in my opinion, in these circumstances, the petitioner now deserves to the privilege of bail. Accordingly, let the petitioner named-above be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned Court in connection with Khaira P.S. Case No. 62 of 2025.

¶18

(Shailendra Singh, J)

¶19

siddharthkr/- U T

Pramod Kumar Manjhi v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Pravesh Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Rambharos Kumar @ Rambharosi @ Rambharos Kunwar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramagya Raut @ Ramgya Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Ramdayal Das Vs The State of Bihar

Golu Kumar @ Vivek Kumar Yadav Vs The State of Bihar