Madhurendra Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78341 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-140 Year-2025 Thana- PIPRAHI District- Sheohar ====================================================== Madhurendra Ray Son of Mohan Ray Resident of Village- Nayagao Mahuawa, P.S.- Piprahi, District- Sheohar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Devendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 15-01-2026 Heard Mr. Devendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Jay Ram Prasad, learned counsel for the informant and Dr. Mrityunjaya Kr. Gautam, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 21.08.2025 in connection with Piprahi P.S. Case No. 140 of 250, F.I.R. dated 18.07.2025 for the offences punishable under Sections 64, 89, 352, 351(2) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, co-accused Dharmendra Ray has committed rape upon the daughter of the informant and when this informant went to the house of the said co-accused then this petitioner along with other accused persons abused him. It is further alleged that the accused persons later

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78341 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026 2/3 on took his daughter and got her pregnancy aborted.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The allegation is against the co-accused, Dharmendra Ray who happens to be brother of the petitioner and due to this reason his name has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the police after investigation submitted the charge sheet against the petitioner. The petitioner is in custody since 21.08.2025.

5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the petitioner is involved in the present crime in question.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances that the petitioner has clean antecedent and there is no specific allegation against the petitioner, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned CJM, Sheohar in connection with Piprahi P.S. Case No. 140 of 2025, subject to the following

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78341 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026 3/3 conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T