Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ram Udar Rawani @ Ram Udar KamkarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner with specified conditions.

Summary

The petitioner, Ram Udar Rawani, feared arrest in a case registered under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023, relating to the alleged murder of Chhotak Yadav. The informant alleged that the petitioner and others were involved in a conspiracy over a financial dispute. The petitioner sought anticipatory bail, relying on a prior order granting anticipatory bail to co‑accused Bilar Kamkar and Ajit Kamkar in a related petition. The State opposed the relief. The Court, after considering the submissions and the earlier order, granted anticipatory bail subject to a bail bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties and a condition that the trial court may cancel the bail if the petitioner fails to cooperate with the investigation.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482(2) of the Bihar Narcotic Substances Act, 2023 in the present case.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • anticipatory bail
  • Section 482
  • bail conditions
  • criminal procedure
  • Bihar
  • murder allegation
  • investigation cooperation

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87563 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-84 Year-2025 Thana- Bahoranpur District- Bhojpur
                 ======================================================
                 Ram Udar Rawani @ Ram Udar Kamkar S/O Bilar Kamkar @ Barmeshwar
                 Kamkar R/O Vill- Karja, P.S- Bahoranpur, Dist- Bhojpur

                                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                         Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. Omprakash Pandey, Adv.
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-02-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case

                   registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and

                   3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner has antecedent of one case but then the said case is of

                   the year 1997. It is next submitted that the informant alleges that

                   her brother-in-law, namely, Chhotak Yadav was consuming

                   liquor in an orchard with Pappu, Ajit, petitioner and Bilar on

                   26.06.2025, further, at 11:00 p.m., her son called, when Chhotak

                   voice felt nervous and he said that a conspiracy is being hatched

                   against him and from behind, voice was being heard. It is

                   further alleged that on 27.06.2025 Mulki informed at 06:00
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87563 of 2025(2) dt.18-02-2026
                                            2/3




          A.M. that Chhotak has been killed, accordingly, the informant

          reached the place of occurrence and saw the dead body lying

          near a tree and a towel was wrapped around his neck, it is next

          alleged that about five months back an amount of Rs.1 lakh was

          given by the brother-in-law of the informant for purchasing cow

          and 20 days back a dispute had arisen with regard to the

          returning of the amount and Pappu had threatened, thus, alleges

          based on suspicion that accused persons including the petitioner

          killed.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

          Bilar Kamkar along with Ajit Kamkar had approached this

          Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Misc. No.67779 of

          2025 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated

          08.10.2025 after considering the case on merits and in detail. It

          is also submitted that petitioner will not abscond rather will

          cooperate in the investigation to prove his innocence.

                       5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for

          anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

                       6. Considering the submissions made by the learned

          counsel for the petitioner and also taking into consideration the

          order dated 08.10.2025 in Cr. Misc. No.67779 of 2025, the

          petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87563 of 2025(2) dt.18-02-2026
                                                         3/3




                       within a period of six weeks from today, be released on

                       anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.25,000/-

                       (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand) with two sureties of the like

                       amount each to the satisfaction of the learned trial court where

                       the case is pending/Successor Court in connection with

                       Bahoranpur P.S. Case No. 84 of 2025, subject to the conditions

                       as laid down under Section 482(2) of the BNSS.

                                    7. However, if the investigating officer of the case

                       files an application before the learned trial court bringing to its

                       notice that the petitioner despite giving assurance to this Court

                       is not cooperating in the investigation, the learned trial court

                       shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.



                                                 (Satyavrat Verma, J)
amit/-

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.