Ramayodhya Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3367 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-249 Year-2025 Thana- MOTIHARI MUFASIL District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ramayodhya Prasad S/o Late Janak Mahto R/o Village - Bela Nirpur, P.S - Chiraiya, District - East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Prateek Tandon, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Anish Chandra, APP For the Informant : Mr. Dhandev Kumar, Advocate Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Gupta, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant.

02. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 249 of 2025 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 103(1), 61(2) of BNS.

03. As per prosecution case, the son of the informant was called out by co-accused Deep Raj and later on, a call was received on the mobile of a relative of the informant from coaccused Deep Raj, who told him about accident of his son. When the informant reached the hospital, he found his son dead. The informant showed suspicion that his son was killed under a

2/4 conspiracy by the petitioner and other co-accused persons.

04. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is completely innocent. Except for suspicion as it appears from the FIR, there is no material against the petitioner. No witness has said about the involvement of the petitioner in the murder of the son of the informant. In fact, none of the witnesses have seen the petitioner taking away the son of the informant. Learned counsel further submits that rather the witnesses stated about the petitioner's son and the son of the informant meting an accident and subsequently, the son of the informant succumbed to his injuries. Learned counsel further submits that if the allegations are taken on its face value, the petitioner was not last seen with the deceased as it can be said only against the son of the petitioner. The postmortem report shows the son of the informant has received a number of injuries which is possible only under an accident. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and he is in custody since 22.10.2025. Charge sheet has been submitted.

05. Learned APP as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant vehemently oppose the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the

3/4 informant submits that the petitioner and co-accused son of the petitioner under a conspiracy caused the death of the son of the informant.

06. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the doubtful nature of allegation against the petitioner and also considering the period of custody of the petitioner, his clean antecedent and submission of charge sheet, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Motihari, East Champaran/concerned Court in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 249 of 2025, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of B.N.S.S. and also the following conditions :

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below.

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the

4/4 terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) DKS/- U T