Patna High Court
Shatrudhan RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court refused to grant bail to the petitioner, holding that the seriousness of the charges and the risk of witness tampering warranted denial of bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Shatrudhan Ram, was charged under sections 126(2), 103(1), 115(2), 118(1), 352 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for allegedly assaulting the informant's husband with a sword, causing grievous injuries that led to death. He applied for regular bail, claiming he was falsely implicated and offering to cooperate with the trial. The State opposed bail, arguing the petitioner’s direct involvement in the homicide and the risk of witness intimidation. After hearing both sides, the Court found the allegations serious and the risk of tampering real, and therefore refused to grant bail. The trial was directed to be expedited within six months.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to the petitioner despite serious charges of homicide and assault with a deadly weapon.
- Whether the petitioner poses a risk of interfering with witnesses if released on bail.
Legislation cited
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 115(2), 118(1), 126(2), 3(5), 352
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- murder
- assault with deadly weapon
- witness tampering
- Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.91597 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-647 Year-2024 Thana- GOPALGANJ TOWN District-
Gopalganj
======================================================
Shatrudhan Ram S/o Late Bahran Ram @ Ramesh Ram R/o Vill-
BasdilaBazar, P.S- Gopalganj Town, Dist- Gopalganj
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
3 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant
of regular bail in connection with Gopalganj Town P.S. Case no.
647 of 2024, registered under sections 126(2), 103(1), 115(2),
118(1), 352 and 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that the seven named accused persons including the petitioner
herein came variously armed and all of them started to abuse the
informant's husband. It is further stated that the petitioner and
one another assaulted the informant's husband on the head with
a sword leading to grievous injuries and the injured
subsequently died in course of treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91597 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
2/3
the petitioner has been falsely indicated in the case. The earlier
application for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order
dated 10.6.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. no.10379 of 2025. There is
land dispute between the parties. There is case and counter case
and the petitioner is in the custody since 25.9.2024. It is further
submitted that as per oral instructions received, charge has been
framed against the petitioner in the learner trial Court vide order
dated 7.2.2026 passed Sessions Trial no. 352 of 2025 in the
Court of District and Additional Sessions Judge-2, Gopalganj.
The petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial and to abide
by any conditions which can be laid by this Court for his release
on bail.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned
APP for the State and learned counsel appearing for the
informant. It is submitted by learned counsel for the informant
that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of having
struck with the sword along with coaccused leading to death of
the informant's husband in course of treatment. It is further
submitted that once the petitioner is enlarged on bail, he will not
permit the witnesses to depose in the trial.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the direct allegation against the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91597 of 2025(3) dt.13-02-2026
3/3
petitioner in the FIR, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the
petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.
7. Learned counsel for the informant further
submits that he will produce the witnesses on each date fixed in
the learned trial Court.
8. Let the trial be expedited and concluded at the
earliest preferably within a period of six months from today.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
Bibhash
U T
Checking your session…