Girendra Mandal @ Girendra Kumar Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45561 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2020 Thana- BANMANKHI District- Purnia

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

Girendra Mandal @ Girendra Kumar Mandal, S/O Late Kanak Lal Mandal, Resident of village- Pipra, P.S- Banmankhi, District- Purnea.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Mr. Bidhu Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP For the Informant : Dr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate Mr. Kshem Sharma, Advocate ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶10

2 14-11-2025

¶11

Heard Mr. N.K. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel for

¶12

the petitioner, Dr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Ramesh Chandra, learned APP for the State.

¶13

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner to obtain regular bail in connection with Banmankhi P.S. Case No. 216 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 325, 379, 302, 506, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. As per disclosure in paragraph ‘3’ of the application, the petitioner has been made accused in twenty cases and out of them, in thirteen cases, he has been acquitted, presently, he is facing trial in seven cases.

¶14

3. As per the prosecution story, on 23.08.2020 at around

¶15

08:30 pm accused persons (1) Girendra Mandal (this petitioner),

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45561 of 2025(2) dt.14-11-2025 2/3

¶17

(2) Jai Kumar Mandal, (3) Rinku Mandal, (4) Devan Mandal, (5) Rakesh Mandal, (6) Raushan Mandal, (7) Satendra Mandal, (8) Ranjan Mandal, (9) Raja Mandal, (10) Subhash Mandal, (11) Chandan Mandal, (12) Santosh Mandal, (13) Chandan Mandal, (14) Anjan Sinha, (15) Mithu Sinha and (16) Gitesh Mandal, all variously armed were sitting in the house of accused Girendra Mandal (this petitioner). When the father of the informant Sushil Kumar Sinha (since deceased) came in front of the house of this petitioner, then this petitioner on the point of pistol stopped the father of the informant and forcibly dragged him in the campus. It is alleged that the petitioner had put country-made katta in his mouth and sons of the petitioner, namely, Jai Kumar Mandal and Rinku were pressing his left hand and co-accused Rakesh Mandal and Raushan Mandal were pressing right hand of Sushil Kumar Sinha. It is further alleged that co-accused Devan Mandal, Satendra Mandal, Subhash Mandal and Chandan Mandal were pressing both the legs of the father of the informant. In the meantime, the petitioner brought iron rod from his house and assaulted on the right hand of the father of the informant as a result of which his right hand was broken. Thereafter, on the order of the petitioner, all other co-accused persons assaulted the father of the informant. The father of the informant was brought to Banmakhi Hospital for his treatment thereafter doctors referred him to Sadar

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45561 of 2025(2) dt.14-11-2025 3/3

¶19

Hospital, Purnea and Bhagalpur Medical College and on 24.08.2020, the father of the informant died.

¶20

4. Earlier, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court after noticing the specific allegation against him of commission of overt act and huge criminal antecedents as also that in the case of the year 2020, he had surrendered only on 23.08.2024 even as the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was rejected twice by this Court on earlier occasion.

¶21

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has informed that out of seven chargesheet witnesses, to his knowledge, four witnesses have already been examined.

¶22

6. Having regard to the specific allegations against the petitioner, the gravity of the offence, criminal antecedents and the fact that now the trial is likely to be concluded in near future, I am not inclined to grant privilege of regular bail to the petitioner.

¶23

7. The prayer for regular bail to the petitioner is refused.

¶24

8. Let the trial be expedited.

¶25

9. This application is dismissed.

¶26

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)

¶27

SUSHMA2/-

¶28

U T