Patna High Court
Ramjee SaoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner subject to conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramjee Sao, sought bail in a case (Suryagarha PS Case No. 256 of 2024) alleging offences under Sections 303(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that co‑accused Devanand Kumar had stolen documents, a mobile phone and cash, and that the petitioner was implicated solely through Devanand's confessional statement, though the petitioner’s name does not appear in the FIR and no incriminating material was recovered from him. The petitioner argued that he was falsely implicated, that a T.I.P. had not been conducted, and that there was no compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The State opposed bail. Considering the lack of direct evidence, the petitioner’s custody period, and the procedural lapses, the Court inclined to grant bail, subject to a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and non‑intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted when the petitioner is implicated only through a co‑accused’s confessional statement and is not named in the FIR
- Whether the absence of a T.I.P. and non‑compliance with Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, warrants bail
- Whether the petitioner’s custody period and lack of material evidence justify bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 303(2), 318(4), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- false implication
- confessional statement
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- evidence
- charge framing
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12197 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2024 Thana- SURYAGARHA District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Ramjee Sao Son of Kapildev Saav (Sao) Resident of Village- Ram Nagar
Ward No. 11 (Mankatha), P.S.- Amahara, District- Lakhisarai (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bhim Kumar Yadav, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pranav Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Suryagarha (Surjgarha/Surajgarha) P.S. Case No. 256 of 2024,
instituted for the offences under Sections 303(2), 318(4) and
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 02.09.2024 at
about 7.00 A.M. accused Devanand Kumar showing himself as
relative of the informant, got him boarded in Innova vehicle and
deboarded the informant at village Mohammadpur and fled
away by taking all the documents, Mobile and Rs. 32000/- cash
kept in the bag.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12197 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner
transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of
the co-accused Devanand Kumar. No incriminating article has
been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner.
Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner has got no
concern with the stolen articles. Learned counsel further
submitted that T.I.P. has not been conducted till date to ascertain
the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. It has
been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is
in custody since 13.10.2025 and has seven criminal antecedents.
There is no compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik
Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case, as also the period of custody undergone by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing
of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Suryagarha
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12197 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
(Surjgarha/Surajgarha) P.S. Case No. 256 of 2024, subject to the
following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner’s own or
close member.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two
consecutive dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of trial.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,
the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…