Ranjan Kumar @ Ranjan Singh @ Bhanta v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10829 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-113 Year-2025 Thana- Kinjar District- Arwal ====================================================== Ranjan Kumar @ Ranjan Singh @ Bhanta son of Ganesh Singh Resident of village- shankarpur, Ps- Imamganj, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Adv Mr. Krish Kumar Lal, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Sangeeta Sharma, APP For the Informant/s :
Mr. S.K. Lal, Advocate Mr. Prihth Kr. Lal, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-04-2026 Heard learned senior counsel Ramakant Sharma for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P for the State.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Kinjar P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 123, 3(5) of the B.N.S.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 18.07.2025 at about 10:00 P.M, the wife of the informant said that she was going to the market and thereafter she went to the house of Ranjan
2/4 Hardware and started quarreling there thereafter Ranjan Kumar (petitioner) called his son Vikrant Kumar on mobile and told her mother is serious and she is being treated at by Dr. Manoj, upon information the son of the informant went there and saw that wife of informant is breathing heavily and is not in a position to walk, the said Dr. Manoj referred her to paliganj and told that she is not in a position to recover and told them to take her to the house. Thereafter, Ranjan Kumar brought the wife from the hospital and on the way she died. Thereafter, the dead body was put near the house of the informant, the informant expressed firm belief that his wife has been done to death by Ranjan Kumar Banta (petitioner), Pritam Kumar and Sonu Kumar by administering her poison.
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated from the allegation and the FIR itself, it would be clear that this petitioner made all efforts, to save the life of the deceased even taking her to one Dr. Manoj and thereafter upon being referred he was taking to the hospital for better treatment but she did not survive anyhow. Moreover post mortem report would suggest that there is no external or internal injury on the person of the deceased and that final opinion on the cause of death of the
3/4 deceased was reserved for want of FSL report. Learned senior counsel has further submitted that the dead body of the deceased as per allegation itself, can be gathered that it was near the house of informant which appears to be not a probable story as projected against the petitioner. Moreover, there is no allegation of assault against the petitioner or any of the co-accused persons, moreover, it has been argued that if there was an intervening quarrel between the deceased and petitioner side, there is no possibility of administering poison orally. Moreover, there was no resisting injury on the person of the deceased. It has lastly been submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since 25.09.2025.
5. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions of the parties and taking into account the facts and circumstance of the case, let the petitioner above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Arwal in connection with Kinjar P.S. Case No. 113 of 2025.
4/4
7. Petitioner is directed to co-operate in the trial and it his further directed that he will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court and the learned Trial Court would be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds, if the petitioner does not cooperate in the trial.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Praveen Kumar, J) niku/- U T