Patna High Court
Umesh RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
Holding
The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to conditions under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.
Summary
The petitioner Umesh Ray was named in an FIR for the alleged murder of the informant’s son, which the FIR claims was staged as a suicide arising from a love‑affair dispute. The petitioner contended that the informant was not an eyewitness and that the allegations were based merely on suspicion, noting that the deceased had previously been convicted under Section 386 IPC and had died by suicide after release from jail. The petitioner also highlighted that a co‑accused, Shivam Kumar, had earlier been granted anticipatory bail by the same court. The State opposed bail, arguing that the petitioner was the father of the girl involved and therefore a prime suspect. Considering the lack of direct evidence, the similarity to the co‑accused’s bail, and the provisions of Section 482(2) of the BNSS, the Court directed that the petitioner be released on anticipatory bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs 10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious allegations of murder and alleged staging of suicide
- Whether the absence of an eyewitness and the grant of anticipatory bail to a co‑accused justify extending bail to the petitioner
Legislation cited
- BNS — s. 103(i), 3(5), 351(2)(3)
- BNSS — s. 482(2)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 386
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- murder
- suicide
- love affair
- suspicion
- Section 482
- Criminal Procedure
- Bihar
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22568 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-281 Year-2024 Thana- BOCHAHAN District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Umesh Ray S/o Saryug Ray R/o Vill- Bhagwanpur Boachcha, P.S.- Bochaha
Dist- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjeev Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Pushpa Sinha.1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
3 15-01-2026 Heard the parties.
2.The petitioner is named in the F.I.R. and
apprehending his arrest in connection with Bochaha P.S. Case
No. 281 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under
Sections 103(i), 351(2)(3), 3(5) of BNS.
3. As per FIR, the deceased was in love with the
daughter of the petitioner which was not approved by petitioner
and his family and therefore, in planned manner the son of
informant was killed by petitioner and family members showing
hanging with the cliff given color to the occurrence as suicide.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the petitioner that both parties are agnets and out of
suspicions petitioner stopped deceased son of informant to roam
around his house. It is pointed out that the informant is not the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22568 of 2025(3) dt.15-01-2026
2/3
eye witness of the occurrence and the entire implications is
based upon suspicion arising out of love affairs. It is pointed out
that the son of the informant was in love with one another girl
belongs to different religion of Lakhimpur, Khiri district (Uttar
Pradesh) and after said marriage the in-laws of the deceased
started creating pressure on deceased to convert his religion and
to join Islam, but same was objected by deceased for which FIR
no. 468/2022 dated 15.08.2022 was lodged for the offence
punishable under Section 386 of the IPC, which was lodged
against the deceased and in furtherance of the same he was
sent to jail on 16.08.2022. It is submitted that after release
from jail he was living separately from his family members and
under said depression he committed suicide. While concluding
arguments, it is submitted that similarly situated co-accused
namely, Shivam Kumar who is the son of the petitioner was
granted anticipatory bail by one of the learned co-ordinate
Bench of this Court through Cr. Misc. No. 19424 of 2025 vide
order dated 13.08.2025. Petitioner claimed clean antecedent.
5. Learned APP while opposing the prayer of bail
submitted that the informant raised strong suspicion against
petitioner being father through FIR.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22568 of 2025(3) dt.15-01-2026
3/3
6. In view of aforesaid factual submission and by
taking note of fact as save and except suspicion being father of
the girl, with whom it is alleged that deceased was in love,
coupled with the fact that the informant is not the eye witness of
the occurrence, where similarly situated co-accused as
discussed aforesaid has already granted anticipatory bail by one
of the learned co-ordinate Bench of this Court, accordingly
petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the court below within a period of four weeks, is directed
to be released on bail, furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of the learned ACJM 9 th Muzaffarpur
(East) /concerned Court, where the case is pending in
connection with Bochaha P.S. Case No. 281 of 2024, subject to
the conditions as laid down under Section 482(2) of BNSS.
(Chandra Shekhar Jha, J.)
S.Tripathi/-
U T
Checking your session…