Ajay Manjhi and 02 others vs State of Bihar — 195/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),329(2),109(1),325,351(2),351(3),3(5). Disposed: Contested--REJECT on 26th March 2026.

Anticipatory Bail

CNR: BRPA300004522026

Case disposed

Filing Number

500/2026

Filing Date

23-02-2026

Registration No

195/2026

Registration Date

23-02-2026

Court

Barh DJ Division

Judge

3-District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV

Decision Date

26th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECT

FIR Details

FIR Number

6

Police Station

Pachmahala

Year

2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Section 126(2),115(2),329(2),109(1),325,351(2),351(3),3(5)
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 482

Petitioner(s)

Ajay Manjhi and 02 others

Adv. VINAY KUMAR

Respondent(s)

State of Bihar

Hearing History

Judge: 3-District and Additional Sessions Judge-IV

26-03-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

HEARING

24-02-2026

HEARING

Final Orders / Judgements

26-03-2026
Order

Summary: The Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Barh (Patna) rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Ajay Manjhi, Ghola Manjhi, and Badal Manjhi, who were accused of assaulting the informant and his family members with weapons causing head injuries during a loan dispute on 14/01/2026. The court found direct and specific allegations supported by injury reports and witness statements in the case diary, and considering the nature, gravity, and seriousness of the accusations, declined to grant anticipatory bail privilege to the petitioners. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge-IV, Barh (Patna) rejected the anticipatory bail petition filed by Ajay Manjhi, Ghola Manjhi, and Badal Manjhi, who were accused of assaulting the informant and his family members with weapons causing head injuries during a loan dispute on 14/01/2026. The court found direct and specific allegations supported by injury reports and witness statements in the case diary, and considering the nature, gravity, and seriousness of the accusations, declined to grant anticipatory bail privilege to the petitioners. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Barh DJ Division All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case