Birendra Ram @ Dome v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78512 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2025 Thana- BUXAR INDUSTRIAL District- Buxar ====================================================== Birendra Ram @ Dome S/O Late Sawali Resident of village- Murar, P.S.- Murar, District- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Arvind Kumar Pradhan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 17-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with Buxar Industrial P.S Case No. 141 of 2025 from the Court of learned CJM, Buxar registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 303(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S 2023.
3. As per allegation in the FIR, two unknown persons have looted the ornaments and money of the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 01.09.2025. It is further submitted that petitioner has got five criminal antecedents as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78512 of 2025(3) dt.17-01-2026 2/2
5. However, learned APP for the State oppose the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.
6. From perusal of the F.I.R., impugned order and case diary, it appears that during investigation accused persons arrested by Investigating Officer and during investigation, Investigating Officer has also conducted Test Identification Parade and victim has identified the petitioner in Test Identification Parade. Petitioner has got total five criminal antecedents in which three of them is of same nature of offence.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, materials available on records and submissions made on behalf of learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
8. Accordingly, prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Mayank/- U T