Patna High Court
Sanjay Kumar Ram @ Sanjay ramversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner as the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar Ram, was arrested in connection with a kidnapping and ransom case (Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 165 of 2025) under Sections 137(2), 140(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He contended that he was falsely implicated, not named in the FIR, and that the prosecution’s evidence was contradictory and lacked any specific overt act linking him to the crime. The State opposed bail, arguing the seriousness of the offences and the petitioner’s criminal antecedents. The Court examined the inconsistencies in the statements of the informant and the victim, noted the absence of direct evidence against the petitioner, and considered the length of his pre‑trial custody. Concluding that the prosecution had not established a prima facie case, the Court granted bail subject to a cash bond and surety, and imposed standard conditions to ensure his appearance and non‑interference with evidence.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the charges of kidnapping and ransom under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
- Whether the prosecution has produced sufficient evidence to justify continued detention of the petitioner.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 137(2), 140(2), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- kidnapping
- ransom
- false implication
- evidentiary contradiction
- pre‑trial detention
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88099 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2025 Thana- TRIVENIGANJ District- Supaul
======================================================
Sanjay Kumar Ram @ Sanjay ram S/o- Mahendra Ram R/v- Rajgawan P.S-
Jadia Dist- Supaul
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Prafull Chandra Thakur, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Choubey Jawahar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State. Perused the case diary.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Triveniganj P.S. Case No. 165 of 2025 instituted for the offences
under Sections 137(2), 140(2), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. Prosecution case, in short, is that the accused
persons kidnapped the informant’s son and demanded Rs.
50,000/- as ransom.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.
Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner
transpired in this case on the basis of statement given by victim.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88099 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No
specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. Learned
counsel further submitted that no cogent or substantive evidence
is placed on record to show the involvement of the petitioner in
the alleged occurrence. Learned counsel further submitted that
there is direct contradiction between the version of the
informant as stated in FIR and the statement of the victim as in
the FIR, the informant has alleged that accused persons
demanded Rs. 50,000/- as ransom whereas the victim has stated
that this petitioner demanded Rs. 5,00,000/- as ransom which
casts doubt on the prosecution story. Learned counsel goes on to
submit that the present FIR is the retaliatory FIR lodged by the
daughter of one of the accused persons being Jankinagar P.S.
Case No. 87 of 2025. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that other co-accused has been granted bail by this
Bench vide order dated 23.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
47215 of 2025. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner
that the petitioner is in custody since 30.05.2025 and has six
criminal antecedents.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88099 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
of the case as also the period of custody undergone by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing
of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of
Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of
the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Triveniganj P.S. Case
No. 165 of 2025, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner’s own or
close member.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two
consecutive dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of trial.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,
the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…