Dismissed¶23

Mannan Sai @ Md. Mannan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC8 Jul 2025CR. MISC./4938/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail rejected; named accused; murder; Sections 302 and 34 IPC; Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 113 of 2019; Gopalganj; surrendered 05.12.2024 after evading arrest for almost five years; no anticipatory bail; sufficient case-diary material; co-accused bail orders 28.02.2020 and 20.02.2021; trial to proceed day-to-day, no unnecessary adjournments; Sourendra Pandey J; 08-07-2025.

What did the court decide?

No bail relief granted; the Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and proceed on a day-to-day basis without granting unnecessary adjournments. ¶23

Mannan Sai @ Md. Mannan Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No bail relief granted; the Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial and proceed on a day-to-day basis without granting unnecessary adjournments.

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, a named accused in Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 113 of 2019 (Sections 302 and 34 IPC) who surrendered on 05.12.2024 and is in custody since, should be enlarged on regular bail. +1 more

¶15

Court's answer

Taking into account that the petitioner is the named accused, that the offence is serious in nature, and that there is sufficient material available in the case diary against him, the Court was not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

The prayer for regular bail of the petitioner was rejected.

¶23

Key takeaways

The learned Trial Court was directed to expedite the trial as the case is of the year 2019, to ensure it proceeds on a day-to-day basis, and to grant no unnecessary adjournments to the petitioner.ratio¶24

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail rejected — Patna High Court (Sourendra Pandey, J.), Criminal Miscellaneous No. 4938 of 2025, decided 08-07-2025: Mannan Sai @ Md. Mannan, named accused in Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 113 of 2019 (Sections 302 and 34, Indian Penal Code), sought regular bail after surrendering on 05.12.2024. His counsel contended he was innocent and falsely implicated on mere suspicion with no eyewitness, that he was the deceased's brother-in-law (dewar) unconnected with the brother's family affairs, and that co-accused had already been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench on 28.02.2020 and 20.02.2021. The APP and the informant's counsel jointly opposed, pointing out that despite being a named accused he had evaded investigation for almost five years without any anticipatory bail application, surrendered only on 05.12.2024, and that his absconding had prevented the trial from commencing. Holding that the petitioner was the named accused, the offence serious in nature, and sufficient material available in the case diary against him, the Court declined bail and rejected the prayer, directing the Trial Court to expedite the year-2019 trial and conduct it day-to-day without unnecessary adjournments.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 4938 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2019 Thana- BAIKUNTHPUR District- Gopalganj

¶3

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

¶4

Mannan Sai @ Md. Mannan Son of Alham Sai Resident of Village- Pipara, P.S.- Baikunthpur, District- Gopalganj

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Bihar Patna

¶7

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶8

====================================================== Appearance :

¶9

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Yogendra Kumar Singh, APP

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶12

4 08-07-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶14

counsel for the informant and learned Additional Public Prosecution for the State.

¶15

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Baikunthpur P.S. Case No. 113 of 2019 registered for the offences under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

As per the prosecution case, the informant has alleged that she had married her daughter to one Samshad Sai. It is further alleged that on 27.05.2019, Mannan Sai (petitioner) and Sadam Sai started drinking in the room which was protested by her daughter upon which an altercation took place which resulted in assault upon the daughter of the informant. It is further alleged that the named accused persons including the petitioner herein in a pre-planned manner had committed the

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 4938 of 2025(4) dt.08-07-2025 2/3

¶18

murder of her daughter.

¶19

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case and no such incident as stated has occurred. Learned counsel further submits that he happens to be the brother-in-law ( dewar ) of the deceased who had no concern with the family affairs of the brother. It is also submitted that there is no eye witness to the occurrence and as such it is merely on suspicion that the name of the petitioner has been inserted. It is lastly submitted that the other co-accused have been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.02.2020 and 20.02.2021 respectively. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is languishing in custody since 05.12.2024.

¶20

Learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant have jointly opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and has pointed out that this case is of 2019 and the petitioner despite being a named accused evaded from the investigation and had not even filed any anticipatory bail application and subsequently he has surrendered on 05.12.2024. Learned APP for the State has further stated that it was on account of the petitioner that the trial has not begun and he has absconded for almost five years.

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 4938 of 2025(4) dt.08-07-2025 3/3

¶22

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that the petitioner is the named accused and the offence is serious in nature and also there is sufficient material available in the case diary against him, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶23

The prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

¶24

However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as the case is of the year 2019 and see to it that the trial proceeds on day to day basis and no unnecessary adjournments are granted to the petitioner.

¶25

(Sourendra Pandey, J)

¶26

Anushka/-

¶27

U T

Mannan Sai @ Md. Mannan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mannan Sai @ Md. Mannan 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

Sahrukh @ Shahrukh Vs The State of Bihar

Vikas Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Nadim Vs The State of Bihar

Amjad Miyan @ Amjad Ali Vs The State of Bihar

Jai Shankar Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Suraj Kumar Vs The State of Bihar