Patna High Court
Ranjeet Kumar @ PradumanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, directing him to furnish a bail bond with two sureties.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjeet Kumar @ Praduman, was arrested in connection with the disappearance and alleged murder of Raja Kumar, whose body was not recovered but was presumed dead after a missing car and phone call. The prosecution’s case rests primarily on the statement of the petitioner’s sister, Riya Devi, who alleged that the petitioner and an accomplice killed the deceased in an honour killing and stole money. The petitioner contended that he is innocent, that the evidence consists solely of his sister’s testimony, and that he has been in judicial custody since 29‑12‑2024. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that there is no material evidence beyond the sister’s statement and that bail is warranted given the prolonged custody. After hearing both sides, the court found the circumstances sufficient to grant bail, directing the petitioner to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.
Issues considered
- What is the adequacy of the evidence, primarily the sister's statement, to justify continued detention?
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the serious nature of the offences (IPC 363, 302, 120(b), 379).
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(b), 302, 363, 379
Subjects
- bail
- honour killing
- IPC
- murder
- theft
- criminal conspiracy
- judicial custody
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47991 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-389 Year-2024 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran
======================================================
Ranjeet Kumar @ Praduman Son of Rudal Singh Resident of village -
Rampur Chandrbhan @ Dagru, Police Station - Mahnar, District - Vaishali.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anant Kumar Bhaskar, Advocate
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Jha, Advocate
For the Informant : Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Madan Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
7 08-01-2026 Heard Mr. Anant Kumar Bhaskar, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mr. Madan Kumar, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with
Sonepur (Sonpur) P.S. Case No. 389 of 2024 registered for the
offence punishable under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code
and later on Sections 302, 120(b), 379 of the Indian Penal Code
has also been added.
3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the son of
the informant, namely, Raja Kumar (deceased), has gone with his
Swift Desire car on booking. When he did not return till 11:15
PM, the informant called her relatives. Raja Kumar (the deceased)
also had a mobile. When she called on his mobile, the call was
picked up by a girl, and she disclosed that this number does not
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47991 of 2025(7) dt.08-01-2026
2/3
belong to the deceased. It is further submitted in the FIR that the
deceased was carrying Rs. 60,000/- with him. The case was filed
against unknown miscreants.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no
offence. He has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that during the course of
investigation, the spy has disclosed the name of the petitioner. The
petitioner has also given his confessional statement. Further, the
sister of the petitioner, namely Riya Devi, has given her statement
recorded under Section 180 of the BNSS before police.
5. He further submits that the case of the prosecution is
based merely on the statement of Riya Devi. Riya Devi, in her
statement, has stated that she was having a relationship with the
deceased. When the deceased and her husband came to know
about this relationship, the petitioner and one Sonu Singh @
Sambhu has killed the deceased. She has further stated that the
deceased had gone with Rs. 80,000/-.
6. She has also stated that the calls from the mobile
phone of the deceased were forwarded to her mobile phone;
however, from her statement, it is clear that she has not seen any
occurrence. She has further stated that the killing was an honour
killing committed by her brother (the petitioner), as that he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47991 of 2025(7) dt.08-01-2026
3/3
himself had stated that he has killed the deceased to save his
prestige in society and threatened her with consequences if she
disclosed the same to the police. Save and except the statement of
this witness, namely Riya Devi, there is nothing against the
petitioner. A report has been called for from the learned trial court,
which goes to show that two witnesses have been examined in this
case. Moreover, the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody
since 29.12.2024.
7. The application for bail is opposed by the learned
counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the period
of custody, this Court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran at Chapra in connection
with Sonepur (Sonpur) P.S. Case No. 389 of 2024.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-
U T
Checking your session…