Ram Kumar @ Ramu v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4420 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-235 Year-2024 Thana- DALSINGHSARAI District- Samastipur ====================================================== Ram Narayan Mahto @ Narayan Mahto @ Narayan Jee Son of Late Ram Lakhan Mahto @ Late Lakhan Mahto Resident (permanent) of village - Sahit, P.S.- Vidyapatinagar, District - Samastipur Presently residing at village - Mokhtiyarpur Salkhanni, Police Station - Dalsingsarai, District - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Mahendra Pratap, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Bharat Lal, A.P.P.
Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 16-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191 ( 2 ), 191 (3) , 190, and 103 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita and 27 of Arms Act.
3. As per prosecution case, informant alleges that on 22.07.2024 while her husband had gone to Civil Court, Dalsingsarai for some work and as he reached near Dainy Chowk, in the meantime, 8 persons came there on three different motorcycles and surrounded the husband of informant. It is further alleged that all the accused persons fired from their pistol and shot dead husband of informant. It is alleged that the aforesaid altercation took place due to previous dispute.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4420 of 2026(2) dt.16-02-2026 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner transpired during course of investigation in the confessional statement of other co-accused persons. Informant is neither eye witness to the alleged occurrence nor she disclosed on what basis she came to know about the name of accused persons who were involved in the alleged occurrence. During investigation, one witness Dhanik Lal Mahto, who claims himself to be eye witness, has not named this petitioner. Except confessional statement, there is no other material to show the complicity of this petitioner in the aforesaid occurrence. Similarly situated coaccused has already been allowed bail by a co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order passed in Cr.Mis.No. 52555/2025. Petitioner is in custody since 30.11.2025. Chargesheet has already been submitted.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and the informant oppose bail application.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and period of custody, the bail application is allowed. Let the above named petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4420 of 2026(2) dt.16-02-2026 3/3 I, Dalsinghsarai, Samastipur in Dalsingsarai P. S. Case No. 235 of 2024.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashi/- U T