Rampani Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45049 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-572 Year-2024 Thana- SONEPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.
Rampani Ray S/O Late Bharat Ray R/O Village-Sabalpur Hasti Tola, PSSonpur, Distt-Saran 2.
Shyam Narayan Ray S/O Late Bharat Ray R/O Village-Sabalpur Hasti Tola, PS-Sonpur, Distt-Saran 3.
Ranjan Kumar S/O Jhimilal Ray R/O Village-Sabalpur Hasti Tola, PSSonpur, Distt-Saran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur, Advocate Mrs. Vaishnavi Singh, Advocate Mr. Ritwik Thakur, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.
2. The petitioners apprehend arrest in connection with Sonepur P.S. Case No. 572 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 103, 238, 61(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. The prosecution case, in short, is that the petitioner along with other co-accused persons committed murder of informant's son.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45049 of 2025(3) dt.10-10-2025 2/3 present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioners are named in the FIR and the informant has named all the family members due to previous enmity. It is next submitted that neither any specific allegation levelled against the petitioners nor there is any eye witness to the said occurrence. The allegation levelled against the petitioners are general and omnibus in nature. Petitioner no. 1 has got four criminal antecedents in which he is on bail, petitioner no. 2 has got two criminal antecedents in which he is on bail and petitioner no. 3 has got four criminal antecedents in which he is on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that other co-accused has been granted regular bail by this Court vide order dated 23.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 22153 of 2025.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioners and submits that paragraph no. 2 of the case diary shows that there is inquest report of the deceased in which legature mark was found as reported in its paragraph no. 5 and in its paragraph no. 8, it has been reported that the deceased was killed by pressing his neck. It is further submitted that in paragraph no. 4 of the case diary, there is re-statement of the informant in which he has supported
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45049 of 2025(3) dt.10-10-2025 3/3 his earlier version and in paragraph no. 43 of the case diary, there is post-mortem report in which cause of death has been assigned to be asphyxia. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
7. The prayer is rejected. However, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court below and pray for regular bail. If any such application is filed, the Court below shall consider and dispose of the same on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T