Patna High Court
Ranvijay KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
The Court held that anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners, subject to the conditions stipulated under Section 438(2) CrPC and Section 482(2) B.N.S.S.
Summary
The petitioners, Ranvijay Kumar and Krishna Devi, sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in P.S. Case No.256 of 2025, which alleged that they were involved in the killing and disposal of the informant’s daughter under Sections 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution’s case was based on the informant’s allegation that the accused murdered his daughter and concealed the body, while the petitioners contended they were falsely implicated as relatives and that the daughter died of natural causes in a hospital. The State opposed the grant of anticipatory bail, arguing a prima facie case existed. The Court, after considering the submissions and the petitioners’ clean antecedents, exercised its power under Section 438(2) of the CrPC and Section 482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and ordered anticipatory bail with stringent conditions. The order emphasized that the bail would be cancelled upon non‑compliance or if the petitioners were later found involved in similar offences, and that the observations would not affect the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners under Section 438 CrPC in view of the alleged offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case sufficient to deny anticipatory bail.
- Whether the conditions imposed under Section 482(2) B.N.S.S. are appropriate to ensure the petitioners’ cooperation with the investigation.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 482(2)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5)
- Criminal Procedure Code — s. 438(2)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Criminal Procedure Code
- Section 438
- Section 482
- false implication
- bail conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 38901 of 2026
Arising Out of P.S. Case No.-256, Year-2025, Thana- PASRAHA, District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Ranvijay Kumar, S/o-Umesh Tanti, R/o- village- Sondiha, Ward no 19, P.S-
Pasraha, District- Khagaria
2. Krishna Devi, W/o- Umesh Tanti, R/- village- Sondiha, Ward no 19, P.S- Pasraha,
District- Khagaria
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 17-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in
connection with Pasraha P.S. Case No. 256 of 2025 registered
for the offence(s) under Section(s) 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (B.N.S.).
3. The prosecution case is to the effect that the
informant has alleged that his daughter was done to death by the
named accused persons including the petitioner. It has been
alleged that the daughter of the informant was killed and her
dead body was made to disappear.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the petitioners have falsely been implicated merely because they
are the sister-in-law and the nephew of the deceased. It has
further been submitted that the petitioner no. 1 being the
“gotini” had no concern with the family affairs of her brother-in-
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38901 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
2/3
law and she was living separately. It has next been submitted
that the allegation of killing the daughter of the informant and
disposing of the body was not correct as the daughter of the
informant was taken to the hospital where in the course of
treatment, she had died. It has lastly been submitted that the
petitioners have clean antecedents.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the
petitioners.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, let
the petitioners, above-named, be released on anticipatory bail, in
the event of their arrest or surrender before the concerned
Court/successor Court within a period of four weeks from today,
on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 10,000/-
(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the concerned
Court/successor Court where the case is pending in connection
with Pasraha P.S. Case No. 256 of 2025, subject to the
conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with corresponding Section
482(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38901 of 2026(2) dt.17-06-2026
3/3
(B.N.S.S.) as well as subject to the following conditions :
(i) One of the bailors of the petitioners shall be their
close relative and the other shall be a local resident.
(ii) The petitioners shall remain physically present
before the concerned Court on each and every date of the
trial and shall cooperate in the investigation.
(iii) In case of absence for two consecutive occasions
or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bonds of
the petitioners will be liable to be cancelled by the
concerned Court.
(iv) If the petitioners, in future, are found to be
involved in similar nature of offence(s), the prosecution
shall be at liberty to move for cancellation of their bail
bonds.
(v) The concerned Court shall verify the criminal
antecedents of the petitioners and in case, at any stage, it is
found that they have concealed their criminal antecedents,
the Court concerned shall take necessary steps for
cancellation of their bail bonds. 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.
7. It is made clear that the observations, if any, made
in this order, shall be of no bearing during the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
sweta/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.