Patna High CourtCR. MISC./48109/2025bail rejected

Ramashish Bhuiyan v. The State Of Bihar

2025-12-02Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48109 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2025 Thana- MADANPUR District- Aurangabad ====================================================== Ramashish Bhuiyan S/o Krishna Bhuiyan R/o vill - Purnadih, P.S- Madanpur, Distt.- Aurangabad, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Aman Vishal, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ramchandra Sahni, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Madanpur P.S. Case No. 119/2025 dated 20.03.2025, registered for the offence under Sections 140(3) of the B.N.S., 2023. Later on, Sections 103(1), 61(2), 238 of B.N.S., 2023 was added vide order dated 28.03.2025.

3. As per the prosecution case, allegation against the petitioner is that he along with other accused persons killed the deceased and burnt his dead body.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in F.I.R. and name of the petitioner surfaced in this case on the confessional statement of coaccused Deepak Kumar and Raushan Kumar @ Karu. Learned

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48109 of 2025(5) dt.02-12-2025 2/2 counsel for the petitioner further submits that there is nothing on record to implicate this petitioner. Petitioner has got clean antecedent and is in custody since 02.04.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that during investigation, son of the petitioner, who claims to be eye-witness to the occurrence, stated that the deceased was killed by this petitioner and others.

6. Considering the materials that have come on record and the fact that son of the deceased is said to be the eyewitness, prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. Petitioner is in custody since 02.04.2025. As such, trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a reasonable time-frame, preferably within a period of one year from today. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) P.K.P./- U