Ram Babu Sahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19498 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2025 Thana- GADHA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Ram Babu Sahni S/O Sugdev Sahni Resident Of Village- Bhale, Premnagar, P.s- Garha, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Satya Nand Shukla, A.P.P.
For the Informant :
Mr. Ashok Kumar Jha, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, informant and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Garha P. S. Case No. 25 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 109, 352, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita to which Section 103(1) BNS was added later on.
3. As per F.I.R., on 15.05.2025 at about 1 PM, father of the informant was building a thatched room where this petitioner along with four unknown miscreants was consuming alcohol. When informant and her sister reached at the site, this petitioner passed lewd comments on them which led to an altercation in which it is alleged that petitioner and others assaulted the father of informant as a result of which, he
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19498 of 2026(3) dt.17-07-2026 2/2 sustained injuries and died during treatment.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of the F.I.R. itself it is apparent that informant is not an eye witness of the alleged occurrence. At best, petitioner is only alleged to be last seen with the deceased. During investigation, no one has claimed to have seen this petitioner committing the offence. Petitioner claims clean antecedent and is in custody since 08.10.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that during investigation, father of the informant stated that this petitioner and four others assaulted him and doctor has found four injuries.
6. Considering the nature of accusation and statement of the deceased, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.
7. However, since petitioner is in custody since 08.10.2025, Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial, preferably, within a period of one year from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Navya/- U T