Allowed

Manish Mandal @ Manish Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC13 Oct 2025CR. MISC./48755/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application under Sections 364A/34 IPC for alleged kidnapping and ransom demand. Court noted period of custody, co-accused already granted bail, and allowed the application subject to conditions including personal appearance before the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties of like amount, subject to condition of physical presence before the court below on each date.

Manish Mandal @ Manish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48755 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-191 Year-2024 Thana- SURSAND District- Sitamarhi

¶3

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

¶4

Manish Mandal @ Manish Kumar S/o Kamlesh Mandal R/o VillageGopalpur, PS- Sursand, District- Sitamarhi

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Madhusudan Rai For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Akshay Lal Pandit ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶7

ORAL ORDER

¶8

2 13-10-2025

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶10

A.P.P for the State.

¶11

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sursand P.S. Case No. 191/2024 dated 22.04.2024 registered for the offence punishable u/s 364A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have abducted the informant's son on the point of pistol and demanded Rs. 20,000/- as ransom. Further, they threatened the informant to pay the said amount otherwise they would kill her son.

¶13

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The other co-accused person has already been granted bail by this court vide order dated

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48755 of 2025(2) dt.13-10-2025 2/3

¶15

13.12.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 66559/2024. The petitioner is not the owner of the motorcycle as referred in the F.I.R. The petitioner has no concern with the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 23.04.2024.

¶16

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner by submitting that the police recovered the victim in the night along with the petitioner and the co-accused person. As per para. 14 of the case diary, the petitioner in his confessional statement has stated that he was involved in the said occurrence and on the basis of the confessional statement of the petitioner, the said Appache motorcycle, which was used for committing the crime was recovered from the house of the co-accused Raunak Mandal. Earlier the regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this court vide order dated 07.10.2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 70791 of 2024.

¶17

6 . Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the period of custody, the petitioner abovenamed, is directed to 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 learned Court concerned, Pupri, Sitamarhi in connection with Sursand P.S. Case No. 191 of 2024 with the condition :-

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48755 of 2025(2) dt.13-10-2025 3/3

¶19

(i) The petitioner is directed to remain physically present before the learned Court below on each and every date, failing which on two consecutive dates without reasonable cause, the bail bond of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled.

¶20

7. This application stands allowed.

¶21

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶22

Atul/-

¶23

U T

Manish Mandal @ Manish Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Mandal @ Manish Kumar v. The State of Bihar

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

Yugal Rai @ Yugul Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Bhola Kumar @ Bhola Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Punam Kumari Vs The State of Bihar

Dipesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Akhilesh Kumar @ Akhilesh Kumar Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Pintu Yadav Vs The State of Bihar