Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Vijendra Ram @ Vijendra KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The court granted bail to the petitioner subject to specified conditions.

Summary

Vijendra Ram, the petitioner, has been in custody since 15 January 2021 in connection with a case involving alleged arson of a victim's daughter over a dowry dispute, with charges under Sections 341, 323, 498(A), 307, 34 and 304(B) of the IPC. The petitioner contends that he was not present at the incident, has a clean antecedent, and that the FIR is fabricated, asserting that he was implicated merely as the deceased's husband. The trial court report indicates that all charge‑sheeted witnesses have been examined, but a key official witness has not yet appeared, and the trial is expected to continue beyond the hearing date. The petitioner has been detained for more than five years without trial, prompting a bail application. The High Court, after considering the prolonged pre‑trial detention and the pending status of the trial, granted bail on a Rs.10,000 bond with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedent.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the prolonged pre‑trial detention of over five years.
  • Whether the nature of the offences and the stage of the trial justify denial of bail under Section 439 of the CrPC.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • pre‑trial detention
  • dowry dispute
  • arson
  • IPC offences
  • trial delay
  • Criminal Procedure Code

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2920 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2021 Thana- MANIYARI District- Muzaffarpur
                 ======================================================
                 Vijendra Ram @ Vijendra Kumar Son of Naresh Ram Resident of Village-
                 Purusottampur, P.S.- Maniyari, District- Muzaffarpur

                                                                                  ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   01-05-2026                        Heard Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh, learned

                   counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned

                   Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

                               2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since

                   15.01.2021 in connection with S.T. No. 102 of 2022 arising out

                   of Maniyari P.S. Case No. 16 of 2021, F.I.R. dated 14.01.2021

                   for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498(A),

                   307 and 34 of the IPC and later on Section 304(B) of the IPC

                   was added.

                               3.     According to prosecution case, all the accused

                   persons including this petitioner set ablaze the informant's

                   daughter due to non-fulfillment of demand of dowry.

                               4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2920 of 2026(4) dt.01-05-2026
                                            2/4




          implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the

          FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed

          any offence as alleged in the FIR. In fact, the petitioner was not

          present at the time of occurrence and he has been made accused

          merely on the ground that he is husband of the deceased. He

          further submits that the police after investigation submitted the

          charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody

          since 15.01.2021 and the trial is not in progress.

                      5. Vide order dated 03.04.2026, a report was called for

          with regard to the stage of trial. Report of the learned Trial

          Court dated 16.04.2026 reveals that "(3) That out of 06 (six)

          Chargesheeted witnesses, all the chargesheeted witnesses have

          been examined in this case. The Prosecution witness was closed

          on 08.07.2025. Then application u/s 311 crpc, to call the

          witness filed on 06.08.2025, which was allowed on 23.12.2025.

          The official witness circle officer, Kudhni, before whom

          fardbeyan of deceased was recorded not appeared yet as

          witness. The case is pending for the evidence of aforesaid

          witness. The next date is fixed on 27.04.2026 for evidence."

                      6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in

          view of the report of the learned Trial Court, the trial is not

          likely to be concluded in the near future and the petitioner is in
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2920 of 2026(4) dt.01-05-2026
                                            3/4




          custody since 15.01.2021 i.e., more than five years.

                      7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has

          vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

                       8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

          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 the learned District &

          Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Muzaffarpur in connection with

          S.T. No. 102 of 2022 arising out of Maniyari P.S. Case No. 16 of

          2021, subject to 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 absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

          reason, his 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 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
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2920 of 2026(4) dt.01-05-2026
                                                        4/4




                      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)
Vanisha/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.