Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ramanand Chaudhary @ Chunni ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The petitioner is entitled to regular bail upon furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Summary

Ramanand Chaudhary applied for regular bail in a murder case (Case No. 347 of 2025) where he is alleged to be the order‑giver, while co‑accused Ranjit Kumar Choudhary and Manjit Kumar allegedly fired the fatal shots. The petitioner claimed false implication, no prior criminal record, and had been in custody for about five months after the chargesheet was filed. The State opposed the bail. The court examined the FIR allegations, the specific role of the co‑accused, the petitioner’s custody duration, and his clean antecedent, and decided to grant bail on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to the satisfaction of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate‑VII, Vaishali.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner, described as an order‑giver in the FIR, is entitled to regular bail.
  • Whether the filing of a chargesheet and five months of pre‑trial detention preclude bail.
  • Whether the nature of the alleged offence under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act warrants denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • regular bail
  • murder
  • false implication
  • chargesheet
  • pre‑trial detention
  • Arms Act
  • Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.663 of 2026
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-347 Year-2025 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali
                 ======================================================
                 Ramanand Chaudhary @ Chunni Chaudhary Son of Late Moharlal
                 Chaudhary R/O Vill.- Marai, P.S.- Mahisaur, District- Vaishali
                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar Patna
                                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate
                                                   Mr. Purushottam Kumar, Advocate
                                                   Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   15-01-2026                    1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                                 2. The petitioner has preferred this application for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Jandaha (Mahisaur) P.S.

                   Case no.347 of 2025 registered under sections 126(2), 127(2),

                   103, 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and

                   section 27 of the Arms Act.

                                 3. As per the prosecution case, on the order given by

                   the petitioner, it is stated that co-accused Ranjit Kumar

                   Choudhary @ Golu Kumar and Manjit Kumar shot the son of

                   the informant leading to his death.

                                 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. Even as per

                   the allegations in the FIR, the petitioner is described to be an

                   order giver. It is submitted that so far as the overt-act is
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.663 of 2026(2) dt.15-01-2026
                                                         2/2




                       concerned, the co-accused named herein above have been

                       described as the assailants. The petitioner is in custody since

                       17.8.2025 and has no criminal antecedent. Chargesheet has been

                       submitted in the case.

                                    5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P

                       for the State.

                                    6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                       taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner in

                       the FIR wherein he is described to be an order giver, the

                       allegation of firing being specific on two other accused persons,

                       the petitioner having remained in custody for about 5 months

                       since 17.8.2025, chargesheet having been submitted in the case

                       and his not having any criminal antecedent, the petitioner is

                       directed to be enlarged on bail in connection with Jandaha

                       (Mahisaur) P.S. Case no.347 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of

                       Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like

                       amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief

                       Judicial Magistrate-VII, Vaishali at Hajipur.



                                                   (Partha Sarthy, J)
Shiv/-

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.