Dhiraj Kumar Ram @ Dhiraj Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66999 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-242 Year-2025 Thana- RAJPUR District- Buxar ====================================================== Dhiraj Kumar Ram @ Dhiraj Ram S/O Kashinath Ram R/o vill - Jalahara, P.S.- Rajpur, Distt.- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravi Shankar Pathak, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Parmanand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 24-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 242 of 2025 registered for the offences under Sections 108 and 3(5) of the BNS.

3. As per prosecution case, petitioner and others took Rs. 1,00,000/- from the husband of the informant on the pretext of mortgaging their land in favour of the husband of the informant. Later on, the petitioner and co-accused refused to mortgage the land to the husband of the informant and gave it to some other person. When the husband of the informant demanded his money back, they abused and assaulted and threatened to implicate in the SC/ST (POA) Act. Subsequently, husband of the informant consumed poison due to the acts of the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66999 of 2025(2) dt.24-09-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. Allegations are completely false and fabricated and the petitioner had never taken any money for mortgaging his land. Informant has not produced any chit of paper of agreement regarding the mortgage or in support of her claim that her husband gave Rs. 1,00,000/- to the petitioner and his family members. It is not believable that on 13.07.2025, husband of the informant went to the house of the petitioner and on next date he committed suicide. It is not a case of abatement of suicide by the petitioner or his family members. Even the family members of the petitioner have been made accused in this case and this shows falsity of the allegation. There is delay of two days in lodging the FIR and the delay has not been explained satisfactorily. Petitioner is in custody since 01.08.2025. Petitioner is having antecedent of 2 cases and he is on bail in both the cases.

5. Learned A.P.P. opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the vague nature of allegation against the petitioner and also

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66999 of 2025(2) dt.24-09-2025 3/3 considering the period of custody of the petitioner, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Buxar/concerned court in connection with Rajpur P.S. Case No. 242 of 2025, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 480(3) of the B.N.S.S. 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.

(iii) In case of absence on three consecutive dates or in violation of the terms of the bail, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the court concerned.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) balmukund/- U T