Patna High Court – Orders
Manish Kumar @ Chuha vs The State Of Bihar on 29 July, 2025
Author: Rajesh Kumar Verma
Bench: Rajesh Kumar Verma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50387 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-168 Year-2022 Thana- KHAGAUL District- Patna
======================================================
1. Manish Kumar @ Chuha S/o Ram Kumar Singh R/o Village- Tata Colony,
P.S.- Maner, District- Patna
2. Chotu Kumar @ Dharmendra Kumar S/o Siddharth Singh @ Siddhnath
Singh R/o Village- Tata Colony, P.S.- Maner, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-07-2025
Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection
with Khagaul P.S. Case No. 168 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 17.06.2022
for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341,
323, 332, 333, 353, 427, 307, 120(B), 337, 338, 506 of Indian
Penal Code and Section ¾ of Damage of Public Property Act.
3. As per the First Information Report, the informant
alleged that the petitioner was member of mob who were
protesting against the government against the Agnipath Scheme. It
further alleged that after sometime the protesters in aggressive
manner started damaging the vehicles present there and they
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50387 of 2025(2) dt.29-07-2025
2/3
vandalized the police vehicle and set private vehicles on fire. They
threw bricks and stones on the police force due to which the police
personnel got severe injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated
in the present case. Although the petitioner is named in the FIR but
from bare perusal of the FIR it appears that there is no specific
allegation against the petitioner rather the allegation against all the
accused persons including the petitioner is general and omnibus in
nature and the name of the petitioner transpired on the basis of
confessional statement of co-accused person, namely, Vikki
Kumar.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
there is no specific allegation against the petitioner and the name
of the petitioner transpired on the basis of confessional statement
of co-accused person, let the petitioner, above named, in the event
of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of
thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-V, Danapur in connection
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50387 of 2025(2) dt.29-07-2025
3/3
with Khagaul P.S. Case No. 168 of 2022, subject to the conditions
as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha
Sanhita and with other following conditions:-
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any
stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal
antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail
bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bond in
terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for
purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T