Patna High Court
Kailash Rajak @ Pramod RajakversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
Bail was denied as the court was not inclined to grant it given the heinous nature of the crime.
Summary
The petitioner, Kailash Rajak, applied for regular bail in a murder case (PS Rangra Case No.188 of 2025) alleging he was falsely implicated. He is accused under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S. for allegedly killing Chhotu Razak with a sharp weapon. The petitioner has been in custody since 9 August 2025 and claims innocence, while the State and the informant’s counsel assert his guilt and present witnesses. The court considered the heinous nature of the offence and the petitioner’s alleged role in the killing. Concluding that the seriousness of the crime outweighs the bail considerations, the court refused bail. The application was dismissed, with a direction that the petitioner may re‑apply if the prosecution causes trial delays.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the accused in a murder case under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the B.N.S.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S. — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- heinous crime
- B.N.S.
- criminal procedure
- bail application
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.87687 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-188 Year-2025 Thana- Rangara District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Kailash Rajak @ Pramod Rajak Son of Late Suresh Rajak Resident of
Village- Sahora, P.S.- Rangra, District- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ranjan Kumar Jha
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 16-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with
Rangra P.S. Case No. 188 of 2025 registered for the offence
under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. The petitioner along with co-accused person is said
to have killed the deceased, namely, Chhotu Razak.
4. The petitioner is in custody since 9.8.2025.
5.Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
the petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in
this case.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and
have submitted that the petitioner is the assailant of the deceased
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.87687 of 2025(3) dt.16-04-2026
2/2
who has cut the neck of the deceased with dabiya (sharp
weapon). Learned counsel for the informant has also undertaken
to produce the witnesses in the trial on the dates fixed in the
trial.
7. Considering the heinous nature of crime and the
role assigned to the petitioner in the killing of the deceased, this
Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.
9. It is made clear that if the trial of the petitioner is
delayed by the prosecution side then the petitioner may renew
his prayer for bail.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.