Sunil Ram v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18467 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-297 Year-2020 Thana- PAROO District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Sunil Ram Son of Genaur Ram R/o Village - Lalu Chhapra, Police Station - Paroo, District - Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Sanjay Kumar S.K., Advocate For the State :
Mr.Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP For the informant :
Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.
2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No. 297 of 2020, registered on 26.05.2020 for the offences under Sections 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, dead body of the minor son of the informant was found in the courtyard of the house. The informant named the petitioner and other coaccused persons with whom ten days back he had some altercation and they threatened the informant that they would murder the child of the informant.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and he has been
2/4 falsely implicated in this case. No offence in the manner as alleged has ever taken place. There is no direct eye witness to the alleged occurrence and the entire prosecution story is based on suspicion. Though a number of persons have been made accused at the time of registration of FIR, after investigation police has submitted charge sheet only against coaccused Ganaur Ram and coaccused Raju Kumar and thereafter, investigation has been kept pending against other coaccused persons including this petitioner. Coaccused Gonour Ram and Raju Kumar having similar allegation have been granted bail by a learned Coordinate Bench vide orders dated 05.06.2023 and 22.09.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1486 of 2023 and Cr. Misc. No. 61443 of 2023, respectively. No specific overt act has been attributed to the petitioner.
The petitioner has been made accused in this case only on suspicion and there is no substantive material to show the complicity of the petitioner in causing death of the son of the informant. The petitioner is in custody since 18.12.2025 and charge sheet has been submitted. The petitioner has got no criminal history.
5. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant oppose the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant submits that
3/4 the petitioner was named by the informant who killed his son due to previous dispute.
6. Having regard to the fact and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties and considering the vague and remote nature of allegation against the petitioner and absence of substantive material against him and also considering his period of custody and submission of charge sheet and clean antecedent of the petitioner, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned JMFC-9, Muzaffarpur/concerned court, in connection with Paroo P.S. Case No. 297 of 2020, subject to the condition laid down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS and other following conditions: (i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.
(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial court.
(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the
4/4 terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Anuradha/- U T