Ramjee Sao v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12197 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-256 Year-2024 Thana- SURYAGARHA District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Ramjee Sao Son of Kapildev Saav (Sao) Resident of Village- Ram Nagar Ward No. 11 (Mankatha), P.S.- Amahara, District- Lakhisarai (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bhim Kumar Yadav, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Pranav Kumar, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Suryagarha (Surjgarha/Surajgarha) P.S. Case No. 256 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 303(2), 318(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that on 02.09.2024 at about 7.00 A.M. accused Devanand Kumar showing himself as relative of the informant, got him boarded in Innova vehicle and deboarded the informant at village Mohammadpur and fled away by taking all the documents, Mobile and Rs. 32000/- cash kept in the bag.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12197 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026 2/3 Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. The name of the petitioner transpired in this case on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused Devanand Kumar. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that petitioner has got no concern with the stolen articles. Learned counsel further submitted that T.I.P. has not been conducted till date to ascertain the involvement of the petitioner in the alleged offence. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 13.10.2025 and has seven criminal antecedents. There is no compliance of Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, as also the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Let the petitioner be released on bail, after framing of charge, if not already framed, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- ( Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Suryagarha

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12197 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026 3/3 (Surjgarha/Surajgarha) P.S. Case No. 256 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:

(I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner's own or close member.

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two consecutive dates without sufficient cause.

(III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during the course of trial.

In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) manish/- U T