Patna High Court
Rintu Ram @ Pintu RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court denied bail to the petitioner, holding that the seriousness of the alleged offence and the stage of the trial warranted the continuation of custody.
Summary
The petitioner, Rintu Ram, sought bail for an alleged offence under Sections 304 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code arising from a dispute that led to the death of a child. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner assaulted the victim's neck with a brick, causing fatal injuries, and presented a post‑mortem report indicating antemortem trauma. The petitioner claimed innocence, lack of eyewitnesses, and a clean antecedent, arguing that the FIR was based merely on suspicion. The court examined the seriousness of the charge, the evidence of assault, and the stage of the trial, noting that most witnesses had already been examined. Concluding that the allegations were grave and the trial was nearing completion, the court declined to grant bail and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the accused in a case of alleged culpable homicide under Sections 304/34 IPC given the seriousness of the allegations and the evidence presented
- Whether the stage of the trial and the examination of witnesses justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304, 34
Subjects
- bail
- culpable homicide
- IPC 304
- IPC 34
- criminal procedure
- trial acceleration
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74408 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-206 Year-2023 Thana- KOCHAS District- Rohtas
======================================================
Rintu Ram @ Pintu Ram S/o- Dinanath Ram Resident of Village- Kuchila
PS- Kochas District- Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Siddharth Harsh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
6 27-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail
in connection with Kochas P.S. Case No. 206 of 2023 registered
for the offence under Sections 304/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected on 11.07.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 34110 of 2024 which
reads as follows:-
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection
with Kochas P.S. Case No. 206 of 2023 dated 14.07.2023
registered for the offence punishable under Sections
304/34 of the I.P.C.
3. As per the prosecution case, on
11.07.2023 at about 3:00 P.M., the informant’ daughter
was feeding the cow in the Goshala after coming from
her school. She kept her dupatta on the cot, in the
meantime, the petitioner’s minor grand-son, Kariyawa
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74408 of 2025(6) dt.27-04-2026
2/3
aged about 07 years, took her dupatta and started
fleeing away. She chased him for obtaining her dupatta
then she got Kariyawa’s sister seated in a field. On the
said matter, the grand father of Kariyawa, Sri Niwas
Paswan started to abuseher and on instigation the
petitioner Rintu Ram assaulted on her neck with brick.
Thereafter, she came back to her home and started
weeping and narrated whole story to the informant.
When the informant went to the house of the petitioner
and the co-accused for asking about the same, they
assaulted her too. The informant along with her
daughter came to her home. In the meantime, the
informant’s daughter fell down on the cot and she died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has
submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely
been implicated in this case. There is no intention of the
petitioner to cause death to the petitioner. There is no
eye witness to the alleged occurrence and only on the
basis of suspicion, the F.I.R. has been lodged by the
informant who is the mother of the deceased. The
petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in paragraph
no. 3 of the bail petition. He is in custody in this case
since 10.10.2023.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has
vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner
and submits that there is specific allegation of assaulting
on the neck of the deceased with brick is against the
petitioner. The P.M. report indicates that the deceased
sustained antemortem injury. The cause of death is due
to traumatic shock caused by hard and solid object with
thrusting force.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case as well as the heinous nature
of allegation against the petitioner, I’m not inclined to
enlarge the petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, the application stands
rejected.
8. Further, the learned trial court is directed
to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the
earliest.
4. At the very outset, the learned counsel for the
petitioner very fairly submits that, in the trial, almost all the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74408 of 2025(6) dt.27-04-2026
3/3
witnesses have already been examined and the trial is on the
verge of conclusion.
5. In view of the above, I am not inclined to grant
regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the application for
regular bail stands rejected.
6. It is expected that the trial shall not be
unnecessarily delayed by the prosecution, as almost all the
witnesses have already been examined.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…