Patna High Court
Vinod Ram @ Vinod Paswan @ Binod Paswan @ Ravi Yadav @ Navin YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted as there is no specific allegation of assault or overt act against the petitioner and a similarly situated co‑accused had previously been released on bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Vinod Ram and co‑accused, were arrested on 2 June 2025 in connection with a 2014 FIR alleging offences under the IPC, Explosives Substances Act, UAPA and the C.L.A. Act, after a police raid that recovered three cane bombs. The prosecution alleged that Naxalites were hiding at a school and named 28 persons, but the petitioner contended that the FIR contained no specific allegation of assault or overt act against him. He pointed out that a similarly situated co‑accused, Bhim Yadav, had been granted bail by a coordinate bench in 2017. The State opposed bail, citing four prior criminal antecedents. The court, noting the absence of a specific allegation against the petitioner and the precedent of bail to the co‑accused, ordered his release on bail with a bond of Rs 10,000 and several conditions, including cooperation with the trial and verification of antecedents.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the serious nature of the charges under the IPC, Explosives Substances Act, UAPA and C.L.A. Act.
- Whether the lack of a specific allegation of assault or overt act against the petitioner warrants bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- C.L.A. Act — s. 17
- Explosives Substances Act — s. 3, 4, 5
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 121A, 122, 124A, 147, 148, 149, 307, 353
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 — s. 13, 16, 18, 20
Subjects
- bail
- IPC
- UAPA
- Explosives Substances Act
- Naxal
- prior criminal antecedents
- trial cooperation
- serious offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76903 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2014 Thana- ROSHANGANJ District- Gaya
======================================================
Vinod Ram @ Vinod Paswan @ Binod Paswan @ Ravi Yadav @ Navin
Yadav Son of Mukhraj Ram @ Mukhraj Paswan Resident of Village -
Golgariva, P.S.- Kutumba (Wrongly mentioned in F.I.R. as village - Kendua,
P.S.- Nabinagar), District - Aurangabad (Bihar)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Aman Vishal, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 21-01-2026 Heard Mr. Aman Vishal, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned Additional
Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
02.06.2025 in connection with Roshanganj (Bankebazaar) P.S.
Case No. 19 of 2014, F.I.R. 19.02.2014 for the offences
punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120B, 121A, 122,
124A, 307, 353 of the I.P.C. and sections 3, 4, 5 of the
Explosives Substances Act and sections 13, 16, 18, 20 of the
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and section 17 of
C.L.A. Act.
3. According to prosecution case, on information that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76903 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
2/4
some naxalities are hiding at Madhya Vidyalaya, Sondaha, the
Police conducted raid and named 28 persons in the F.I.R.,
whereas 25 naxalties are not named. The police found 3 cane
bombs weighing 5 kg. each at the place but all the naxalties
managed to flee away.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is innocent and the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R.
is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any
offence as alleged in the F.I.R. From bare perusal of F.I.R. it
appears there is no specific allegation of any assault or overt act
attributed against the petitioner and similarly situated co-
accused, namely, Bhim Yadav @ Hari Mohan has been granted
regular bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated
13.09.2017 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 34247 of 2017. He further
submits that the police after investigation, submitted
chargesheet against the petitioner and the petitioner is in custody
since 02.06.2025.
5. Learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer
for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries
four more criminal antecedents other than the present one.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
and the fact that there is no specific allegation of any assault or
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76903 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
3/4
overt act attributed against the petitioner and similarly situated
co-accused person has been granted bail by a Coordinate Bench
of this Hon’ble Court, let the petitioner, above named, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Sherghati, Gaya (Bihar) in connection with Roshanganj
(Bankebazaar) P.S. Case No. 19 of 2014, with the following
conditions:
i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
iii. And further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76903 of 2025(3) dt.21-01-2026
4/4
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-
U T
Checking your session…