Patna High Court
Ramayodhya PrasadversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
The court ordered the release of the petitioner on bail, finding the allegations against him doubtful and noting his clean antecedent.
Summary
Ramayodhya Prasad applied for bail in a case (Muffasil P.S. No. 249 of 2025) alleging offences under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of the BNS. The prosecution alleges that the petitioner conspired with co‑accused to cause the death of the informant's son, who was found dead after an alleged accident. The petitioner contended that he was falsely implicated, that no witness placed him at the scene, and that the post‑mortem indicated injuries consistent with an accident, not homicide. The State and the informant opposed bail, insisting on the conspiracy theory. Considering the doubtful nature of the allegations, the petitioner’s clean antecedent, the length of his custody, and the filing of the charge‑sheet, the court granted bail subject to Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. and specific conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. given the nature of the allegations and evidence.
- Whether the prosecution has established sufficient prima facie evidence to justify continued detention.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Section 480(3)
- conspiracy
- clean antecedent
- accident vs homicide
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3367 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Ramayodhya Prasad S/o Late Janak Mahto R/o Village - Bela Nirpur, P.S -
Chiraiya, District - East Champaran
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prateek Tandon, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Anish Chandra, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Dhandev Kumar, Advocate
Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Gupta, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the informant.
02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 249 of 2025 registered
for the alleged offences under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of BNS.
03. As per prosecution case, the son of the informant
was called out by co-accused Deep Raj and later on, a call was
received on the mobile of a relative of the informant from co-
accused Deep Raj, who told him about accident of his son.
When the informant reached the hospital, he found his son dead.
The informant showed suspicion that his son was killed under a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3367 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/4
conspiracy by the petitioner and other co-accused persons.
04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is
completely innocent. Except for suspicion as it appears from the
FIR, there is no material against the petitioner. No witness has
said about the involvement of the petitioner in the murder of the
son of the informant. In fact, none of the witnesses have seen
the petitioner taking away the son of the informant. Learned
counsel further submits that rather the witnesses stated about the
petitioner's son and the son of the informant meting an accident
and subsequently, the son of the informant succumbed to his
injuries. Learned counsel further submits that if the allegations
are taken on its face value, the petitioner was not last seen with
the deceased as it can be said only against the son of the
petitioner. The postmortem report shows the son of the
informant has received a number of injuries which is possible
only under an accident. The petitioner has no criminal
antecedent and he is in custody since 22.10.2025. Charge sheet
has been submitted.
05. Learned APP as well as learned counsel appearing
on behalf of the informant vehemently oppose the submission
made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3367 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/4
informant submits that the petitioner and co-accused son of the
petitioner under a conspiracy caused the death of the son of the
informant.
06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and
submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the
doubtful nature of allegation against the petitioner and also
considering the period of custody of the petitioner, his clean
antecedent and submission of charge sheet, the petitioner above
named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds
of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran/concerned Court in
connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 249 of 2025, subject to
the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of B.N.S.S. and also
the following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors will be a close
relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present
on each and every date fixed by the
court below.
(iii) In case of absence on three
consecutive dates or in violation of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3367 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
4/4
terms of the bail, the bail bond of the
petitioner will be liable to be cancelled
by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
DKS/-
U T
Checking your session…