Patna High Court
Mohan Ram @ Brij Mohan RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that bail must be granted as the petitioners were not named in the FIR, there was no credible evidence against them, and the confessional statement of a co‑accused is inadmissible.
Summary
The Patna High Court heard two bail applications arising from the same murder case (Suryapura PS Case No.188 of 2025) in which petitioners Panna Lal Ram and Mohan Ram (Brij Mohan Ram) were implicated under Sections 103, 61(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. The prosecution’s case was based on a deceased’s husband’s murder, but the petitioners were not named in the FIR; their alleged involvement stemmed from a confessional statement of a co‑accused and mere suspicion of the parents. Both petitioners argued there were no eyewitnesses, no material evidence, no prior criminal record and that the confessional statements lacked evidentiary value. The State opposed bail. Considering the lack of substantive evidence and the petitioners’ clean records, the Court ordered that each be released on regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties. The applications were therefore allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioners in the absence of their names in the FIR and substantive evidence
- Whether a confessional statement made to police, which is inadmissible, can be the basis for denial of bail
- Whether the lack of eyewitness testimony and material incriminating evidence justifies granting bail
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103, 3(5), 61(2)
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- FIR
- confessional statement
- lack of evidence
- judicial custody
- Patna High Court
- Sections 103 61(2) 3(5) of B.N.S.
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88643 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2025 Thana- SURYAPURA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Panna Lal Ram S/o Bega Ram Permanent Resident of Village- Kavai, P.S.-
Dawath, Imirta, P.S.- Suryapura, District- Rohtas- 802221, Present Address-
Gayatri Bhog Colony Nayagaon, Bhiwani, Santhala, Alwar, Biwani ind. Area,
Alwar, P.S.- Alwar, Rajasthan- 301019
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1656 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2025 Thana- SURYAPURA District- Rohtas
======================================================
Mohan Ram @ Brij Mohan Ram S/o Late Chunmun Ram Resident of
Village- Kavi, P.O.- Dawath, P.S.- Surajpura, District- Rohtas, Bihar -802221
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 88643 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Purushottam Narayan Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Ojaswee Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1656 of 2026)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Purushottam Narayan Mishra, Advocate
Mr. Shivam Aniket, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 18-04-2026 Both these applications are arising from the same P.S
Case i.e. Suryapura P.S. Case No. 188 of 2025, hence, they are
being heard together and are being disposed of by a common
order.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88643 of 2025(4) dt.18-04-2026
2/4
APP for the State.
2. The petitioners have preferred these applications
for grant of regular bail in connection with Suryapura P.S. Case
No. 188 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 103, 61(2) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant has
alleged that on 02.06.2025 at about 8:00 A.M., her husband had
gone to Bikramganj. Thereafter, at about 9:00 A.M., she
received information that her husband had been done to death,
and his dead body was lying on the eastern side of the canal
near the Imrita village.
4. Submissions on behalf of the petitioner Panna
Lal Ram in Cr. Misc. No. 88643 of 2025
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the petitioner is not named in the FIR and has been falsely
implicated in this case merely on the basis of suspicion. It has
further been submitted that there is no eye witness to the alleged
occurrence of the murder. The FIR was lodged after the
recovery of the dead body of the deceased, and during the
investigation, the mother and father of the deceased expressed
only suspicion, apart from such suspicion, there is no cogent and
reliable material against the petitioner. The petitioner has no
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88643 of 2025(4) dt.18-04-2026
3/4
criminal antecedents and is in judicial custody since 11.07.2025.
The charge sheet has been submitted, and there is no allegation
of tampering with evidence. Moreover, the confessional
statement of the petitioner before the police has got no
evidentiary value in the eyes of the law, and no incriminating
material has been recovered from the possession of the
petitioner.
5. Submissions on behalf of the petitioner Mohan
Ram @ Brij Mohan Ram in Cr. Misc. No. 1656 of 2026
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the petitioner is not named in the FIR, and his name has
surfaced only on the basis of the confessional statement of co-
accused Panna Lal while in police custody, which has got no
evidentiary value in the eyes of the law. It has further been
submitted that there is no eye witness to the alleged occurrence
of the murder. The FIR was lodged after the recovery of the
dead body of the deceased, and during the investigation, the
mother and father of the deceased expressed only suspicion,
apart from such suspicion, there is no cogent and reliable
material against the petitioner. No incriminating material has
been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. The
petitioner has no criminal antecedents and is in judicial custody
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88643 of 2025(4) dt.18-04-2026
4/4
since 09.06.2025. The charge sheet has been submitted, and
there is no allegation of tampering with evidence.
6. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for bail of the petitioners.
7. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the
parties and taking into account the facts and circumstance of the
case, let the petitioners, above-named, be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction
of learned Court concerned, Rohtas, in connection with
Suryapura P.S. Case No. 188 of 2025.
8. The applications stand allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
Jyoti/-
U T
Checking your session…