Patna High Court
Ramjee Kumar @ Ramjee Mahto @ Ramjee MehtaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail may be granted despite the earlier cancellation of anticipatory bail, subject to stringent conditions to ensure the petitioner’s cooperation and prevent interference with the trial.
Summary
Ramjee Kumar, accused of offences under Sections 498A, 341, 323, 313, 34 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, has been in custody since 10 October 2025 after his anticipatory bail was cancelled for not paying a Rs.5,000 bond to the informant, his wife. He applied for regular bail, which was opposed by the informant and the State. The High Court examined whether the cancellation of anticipatory bail and the seriousness of the charges barred further bail. It held that bail could be granted provided strict conditions were imposed to ensure the petitioner’s cooperation, prevent tampering with evidence, and verify his criminal antecedents. Accordingly, the court released the petitioner on bail with a Rs.10,000 bond and two sureties, subject to detailed conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted after the cancellation of anticipatory bail for non‑fulfilment of its conditions
- Whether the nature of the offences (dowry‑related and other IPC offences) warrants denial of bail
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court are appropriate and sufficient to safeguard the trial
Legislation cited
- Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 313, 323, 34, 341, 498A
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- dowry prohibition
- IPC offences
- criminal procedure
- conditions of bail
- non‑fulfilment of bail condition
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15025 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2020 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Rohtas
======================================================
Ramjee Kumar @ Ramjee Mahto @ Ramjee Mehta S/O Sundar Mahto @
Sundar Mehta R/O Badi Kala, P.S.- Barun, Dist.- Aurangabad, Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Pushpa Devi D/O Dashrath Singh R/O Vill.- Makrain, P.O. and P.S.-
Dalmianagar, Dist.- Rohtas.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sunil Kumar Mishra, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Braj Kishore Pd., APP
For the Informant : Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 10-03-2026 Heard Mr.Sunil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for
the petitioner, Mr. Raghunandan Kumar Singh, learned counsel
for the informant and Mr.Braj Kishore Pd., learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
10.10.2025 in connection with Dehri Mahila P.S. Case No. 16 of
2020, F.I.R. dated 13.03.2020 registered for the offence
punishable under Sections 498(A),341,323,313,34 of IPC and
Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
3. Earlier the petitioner has been granted privilege of
anticipatory bail vide order dated 28.11.2022 passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 34040 of 2022 with a condition that the petitioner shall pay
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15025 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
Rs. 5,000/- to the informant, who happens to be the wife of the
petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submit sthat the
petitioner has not fulfilled the condition due to some financial
crisis so the bail bond of the petitioner has been cancelled vide
order dated 23.12.2025 and the petitioner is in custody since
10.10.2025.
4. Learned counsel for the informant and learned
A.P.P. for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail
of the petitioner.
5. Considering the aforesaid facts, let the petitioner,
above named, 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 learned C.J.M., Sasaram, Rohtas in
connection with Dehri Mahila P.S. Case No. 16 of 2020, with
the 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/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15025 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
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 bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Nitesh/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.