Ranveer KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90688 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-371 Year-2024 Thana- BELDOUR District- Khagaria
                 ======================================================
                 Ranveer Kumar S/o Ram Yadav @ Ramanand yadav Resident of Village-
                 Sathma, P.S.- Beldaur, District- Khagaria
                                                                    ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                     Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                             ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Braj Bhusan Poddar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   12-02-2026                     Heard the parties.

                                 2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for

                   grant of regular bail in connection with Beldaur P.S. Case No.

                   371 of 2024. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was

                   rejected vide order dated 16.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.

                   17241 of 2025 which reads as under:-

                                                “Heard      the    learned     counsel     for      the
                                   petitioner, learned APP appearing for the State and the
                                   learned counsel for the informant.
                                                2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in
                                   connection with Beldaur P.S. Case No. 371 of 2024
                                   registered for the offence under Sections 103(1), 61(2),
                                   3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and under
                                   Section 27 of the Arms Act.
                                                3. The deceased was killed in the night.
                                   During investigation it has come that the petitioner
                                   had planned the murder which was committed by
                                   petitioner’s brother namely Mantu Yadav along with
                                   his friends and relatives. On the date of occurrence, the
                                   petitioner went to the Sasural of his brother Mantu
                                   Yadav and was staying there. Mantu Yadav killed the
                                   deceased and this information was given to the
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90688 of 2025(2) dt.12-02-2026
                                                      2/2




                                    petitioner who verified it from his father.
                                                  4. Co-accused namely Ram Yadav @ Rama
                                    Nand Yadav was acting as a liner and he had verified
                                    the killing of the deceased. All the accused persons had
                                    conspired to kill the deceased. The analysis of call
                                    records also supports the confessional statements.
                                                  5. Considering the aforesaid facts and
                                    circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the
                                    petitioner.
                                                  6. Accordingly, this application for regular
                                    bail is dismissed.”
                                 3. It has very fairly been submitted by the learned

                    counsel for the petitioner that the charge has already been

                    framed in this case.

                                 4. In view of the fact that the trial is progressing and

                    the considering the gravity of the offence, this Court finds no

                    new ground to review its earlier order.

                                 5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

                                 6. The Superintendent of Police, Khagaria is directed

                    to ensure the attendance of the witnesses in the trial.

                                 7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the

                    Superintendent of Police, Khagaria through FAX for its

                    compliance.


                                                               (Sandeep Kumar, J)
Vikas/-
U