Patna High Court
Ranjeet Kumar Singh @ Ranjeet SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that the presence of direct and specific allegations, corroborated by witnesses and a post‑mortem report, warranted the refusal of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Ranjeet Kumar Singh, was arrested on 10 September 2025 in connection with a FIR under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, alleging that he doused his mother’s body with kerosene, causing fatal burns. He sought bail, claiming a clean antecedent, service in the CRPF, and that he was falsely implicated due to a family maintenance dispute. The prosecution, supported by the informant’s statements, the deceased’s dying declaration, and the daughter’s testimony, presented direct and specific allegations corroborated by a post‑mortem report. The court examined the seriousness of the charge, the strength of the evidence, and the risk of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. Concluding that the allegations were substantiated and the offence grave, the court refused the bail application. The petition for bail was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a case of alleged murder under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023
- Whether the evidence presented by the prosecution justifies denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- Section 103
- Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita
- post‑mortem report
- family dispute
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86160 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2025 Thana- TILAUTHU District- Rohtas
======================================================
Ranjeet Kumar Singh @ Ranjeet Singh Son of Harihar Singh @ Hari Singh
Resident of Village- Jhobar, P.S.- Medani Nagar, District- Palamu (Jharkhand)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Namrata Mishra, Sr. Advocate
: Mr. Chhote Lal Mishra, Advocate
: Ms. Jyoti Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Sauravh Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 30-03-2026 Heard Ms. Namrata Mishra, learned senior
counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned
A.P.P. for the State and Mr. Sauravh Singh, learned counsel for
the Informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
10.09.2025 in connection with Tilauthu P.S. Case No. 189 of
2025, FIR dated 27.06.2025 registered for the offence under
Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to the prosecution case, the informant
alleged that on 29.04.2025, the petitioner (informant’s father)
sprinkled kerosene oil on the body of her mother and put on fire
due to which her mother sustained burned-injury and later taken
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86160 of 2025(3) dt.30-03-2026
2/3
to hospital for treatment and there she died during treatment.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has
falsely been implicated in this case. Infact the petitioner is in
CRPF posted in Delhi. The relationship between the petitioner
and the deceased was strained. Pursuant to an order of the
Family Court, the petitioner was paying maintenance of ₹15,000
per month to the deceased. However, due to non-payment of the
said amount, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the
present case and the petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since
10.09.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as
learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, have vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that
from perusal of paragraph no.22 of the case diary it appears that
the deceased has narrated entire story before she had died to her
daughter and apart from that the daughter of the deceased has
also supported the case of the prosecution which is recorded in
paragraph-44 of the case diary and stated that the petitioner
sprinkled kerosene oil on the body of her mother.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case as well as the fact that there is direct
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86160 of 2025(3) dt.30-03-2026
3/3
and specific allegation against the petitioner supported by
witnesses and post-mortem report, I am not inclined to enlarge
the petitioner on bail in connection with Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Rohtas, Sasaram pending in the Court of Tilauthu
P.S. Case No. 189 of 2025,
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Suruchi/-
U T
Checking your session…