Patna High Court
Randhir Kumar @ Randhir RayversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
Holding
Anticipatory bail was refused for the petitioners.
Summary
The petitioners, four members of the deceased's wife's family, applied for anticipatory bail in a case registered under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita concerning the alleged murder of the informant's son. They argued that they are not eye‑witnesses, have clean antecedents, and were implicated only on suspicion. The State opposed the bail, contending that investigation revealed the petitioners assaulted the deceased during a dispute. After hearing both sides, the Court considered the seriousness of the accusations and the material on record. It concluded that the nature of the allegations warranted denial of anticipatory bail. Consequently, the petitioners' bail application was refused.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Whether the petitioners pose a risk of absconding, tampering with evidence, or influencing witnesses
- Whether the petitioners' clean antecedent outweighs the seriousness of the alleged offences
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- criminal procedure
- murder
- suspicion
- clean antecedent
- bail refusal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87226 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-127 Year-2025 Thana- RAMPUR HARI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
1. Randhir Kumar @ Randhir Ray S/o- Sogarath Ray R/v- Mohanpur Ps-
Rampurhari Dist- Muzaffarpur
2. Ranvir Kumar @ Ranvir Ray @ Ramvir Kumar S/o- Sogarath Ray R/v-
Mohanpur Ps- Rampurhari Dist- Muzaffarpur
3. Rahul Ray S/o- Lal Babu Ray R/v- Chhapra Ps- Rampurhari Dist-
Muzaffarpur
4. Brajesh Ray @ Brajesh Kumar S/o- Lalbabu Ray R/v- Chhapra Ps-
Rampurhari Dist- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nachiketa Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH
ORAL ORDER
3 20-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the
State.
2. Petitioners apprehend arrest in Rampurhari
(Rampur Hari) P. S. Case No. 127 of 2025 registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita.
3. As per F.I.R., on 11.06.2025, son of the informant
went to his Sasural to attend a marriage ceremony. Later on,
informant came to know that his son has been killed by the
accused persons.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87226 of 2025(3) dt.20-02-2026
2/2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
informant is not an eye witness to the occurrence. Petitioners are
family members of the wife of deceased and they have been
made accused in this case only on suspicion. Petitioners claim
clean antecedent.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposed
the bail application and submitted that during investigation it
has come that on the issue of DJ, altercation took place between
the parties in which these petitioners assaulted the deceased.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and materials
available on record, prayer for anticipatory bail of the
petitioners is refused.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J)
Navya/-
U T
Checking your session…