Tukan Ravidas v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21001 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-296 Year-2024 Thana- KHAIRA District- Jamui ====================================================== Tukan Ravidas Son of Late Arjun Ravidas Resident of Village- Ojhawadih, P.S.- Khaira, District- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Sameer Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Ms. Veena Kumari Jaiswal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 15-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial no.464 of 2025 (arising out of Khaira P.S. Case no.296 of 2024) registered under section 103(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states that as a result of an old land dispute, the petitioner called her husband to his home and thereafter assaulted him with a lathi as a result of which he died on the spot. Post-mortem examination was conducted and thereafter she is giving the report to the police.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case by the informant. The petitioner and the deceased happen to be full
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21001 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026 2/3 brothers and there is admitted land dispute between the parties. The relationship between the parties has been suppressed by the informant in the FIR with the oblique reason to implicate the petitioner. The contents of the post-mortem report does not support the allegation of assault with a lathi. While the occurrence is said to have taken place on 27.7.2024 at 7 p.m., information was given to the police only on 29.7.2024 without any explanation for the delay. The petitioner is in custody since 17.7.2025 and charge has been framed in the learned trial Court on 3.12.2025. The petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegations against the petitioner in the FIR, the material that has transpired in course of investigation, the contents of the post-mortem report, the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner as noted herein above, the petitioner having remained in custody since 17.7.2025 and charge having been framed in the learned trial Court on 3.12.2025, the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on bail in connection with Sessions Trial no.464 of 2025 (arising out of Khaira P.S. Case no.296 of 2024) on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21001 of 2026(4) dt.15-07-2026 3/3 furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge VIII, Jamui on the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial and shall cooperate in the trial. (ii) In case the petitioner is absent on any single date for reasons not to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court or the learned trial Court is of the opinion that the trial is being delayed due to non-cooperation on part of the petitioner, the learned trial Court may cancel the bail bond of the petitioner and take him into custody till conclusion of the trial. (Partha Sarthy, J) Saurabh/- U T