Ranjeet Kumar Singh @ Ranjeet Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86160 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-189 Year-2025 Thana- TILAUTHU District- Rohtas ====================================================== Ranjeet Kumar Singh @ Ranjeet Singh Son of Harihar Singh @ Hari Singh Resident of Village- Jhobar, P.S.- Medani Nagar, District- Palamu (Jharkhand) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Ms. Namrata Mishra, Sr. Advocate :
Mr. Chhote Lal Mishra, Advocate :
Ms. Jyoti Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP For the Informant :
Mr. Sauravh Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 30-03-2026 Heard Ms. Namrata Mishra, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. Sauravh Singh, learned counsel for the Informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 10.09.2025 in connection with Tilauthu P.S. Case No. 189 of 2025, FIR dated 27.06.2025 registered for the offence under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.
3. According to the prosecution case, the informant alleged that on 29.04.2025, the petitioner (informant's father) sprinkled kerosene oil on the body of her mother and put on fire due to which her mother sustained burned-injury and later taken
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86160 of 2025(3) dt.30-03-2026 2/3 to hospital for treatment and there she died during treatment.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. Infact the petitioner is in CRPF posted in Delhi. The relationship between the petitioner and the deceased was strained. Pursuant to an order of the Family Court, the petitioner was paying maintenance of ₹15,000 per month to the deceased. However, due to non-payment of the said amount, the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and the petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 10.09.2025.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from perusal of paragraph no.22 of the case diary it appears that the deceased has narrated entire story before she had died to her daughter and apart from that the daughter of the deceased has also supported the case of the prosecution which is recorded in paragraph-44 of the case diary and stated that the petitioner sprinkled kerosene oil on the body of her mother.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as the fact that there is direct
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86160 of 2025(3) dt.30-03-2026 3/3 and specific allegation against the petitioner supported by witnesses and post-mortem report, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas, Sasaram pending in the Court of Tilauthu P.S. Case No. 189 of 2025,
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T