Patna High Court
Ramesh MukhiyaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Ramesh Mukhiya was arrested in a murder case under IPC sections 363, 364 and 34 after an informant alleged that Mukhiya had confessed to killing Tuntun Sahani. The petitioner contended that he is innocent, pointing out that the victim's wife, under a Section 164 statement, said the victim had returned home and that no body has been recovered. The prosecution’s case relied mainly on the informant’s claim, while the investigating officer’s affidavit indicated no material linking Mukhiya to the crime. The petitioner’s co-accused, Bhuar Yadav, had previously been granted bail in a similar case. After hearing both sides, the court found the evidence insufficient to justify continued detention and ordered the release of Mukhiya on regular bail upon furnishing a bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner, charged with murder under IPC sections 363, 364 and 34, is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offence and the absence of the victim's body.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 164
- Indian Penal Code — s. 34, 363, 364
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- CrPC
- missing body
- regular bail
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22551 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-563 Year-2023 Thana- GOVINDGANJ District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Ramesh Mukhiya, S/o- Lalji Mukhiya, R/v- Mananpur, Ps- Govindganj, Dist-
East Champaran, Motihari
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Namita Sharma, Advocate
Mr. Anshu Dhar Sharma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Section 363, 364
and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that the
brother of the informant was missing. When the informant
asked from Ramesh Mukhiya, where he was working from
two-three years, Ramesh Mukhiya told that he along with one
Bhuar Yadav and others has killed Tuntun Sahani.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He has
falsely been implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22551 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
2/3
petitioner has submitted that it is admitted that Tuntun Sahani
was working in the orchestra of this petitioner. It has further
been submitted that during course of investigation, the wife of
Tuntun Sahani has given her statement under Section 164 of
the Cr.P.C. Learned trial Court has recorded that under Section
164 Cr.P.C., the wife of Tuntun Sahani has stated that about
two months back she went with her husband at Chiraiya for
work and where they were engaged in orchestra. After 2-3 days
her husband has taken some advance from the owner and that
he going to his house and since then he became traceless. Since
her husband has taken advance therefore the owner has not
relieved her and she somehow fled away for search of her
husband. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the statement of wife of Tuntun Sahani makes it clear that
Tuntun Sahani has returned to his house. It has further been
submitted that in this case, till today, the body of Tuntun Sahani
or Tuntun Sahani is not yet recovered. In this regard, S.P.,
Motihari has also filed a counter affidavit wherein he has stated
that every endeavour has been made by him to recover the
body of Tuntun Sahani. The material which has come during
investigation does not suggest the involvement of this
petitioner. The role of the petitioner in this case is dubious.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22551 of 2026(2) dt.17-04-2026
3/3
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in this
case, petitioner along with one Bhuar Yadav was named and
Bhuar Yadav has been granted bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc.
No. 55474 of 2024. The case of this petitioner stands on similar
footing. He is having no criminal antecedent and he is
languishing in judicial custody since 15.12.2025.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State has
vehementl opposed the prayer of regular bail.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court
is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Govindganj P.S. Case No. 563 of 2023 on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Ist, East
Champaran, Motihari.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…