Dismissed¶24

Ram Naresh Ray v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC25 Jul 2025CR. MISC./14998/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail rejected; Patna High Court; CRL. MISC./CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14998 of 2025; order dated 25-07-2025; Rudra Prakash Mishra, J; Ram Naresh Ray v. State of Bihar; Bidupur P.S. Case No. 572 of 2023; District Vaishali; Sections 302, 120B IPC; Section 27 Arms Act; murder by conspiracy of informant's son; co-accused statement paragraph 53 case diary; Prabhat Kumar; Santosh Kumar; Rupa Kumari; illicit relationship motive; omnibus allegation; no criminal antecedent; surrender within six weeks; regular bail on own merit.

What did the court decide?

No bail granted; anticipatory bail rejected, with a conditional assurance that a regular bail application following surrender within six weeks will be considered on its own merit without prejudice by this order. ¶24

Ram Naresh Ray Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2025)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14998 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-572 Year-2023 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Ram Naresh Ray Son of Ram Hulas Ray Resident of Village- Kutubpur, Chakmahmad, P.S.- Bidupur, District- Vaishali

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, APP For the Informant : Mr. Ranjit Kumar Thakur, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶9

ORAL ORDER

¶10

4 25-07-2025

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned

¶12

counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

¶13

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection

¶14

with Bidupur P.S. Case No. 572 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 302, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶15

Accusation against the accused persons is of commission of murder of the informant’s son by hatching conspiracy.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submitted that as per paragraph no. 53 of the case diary, co-accused Prabhat Kumar has specifically

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14998 of 2025(4) dt.25-07-2025 2/3

¶18

stated that it was the Santosh Kumar who committed the murder of the deceased. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that general and omnibus allegation has been made against the petitioner. No specific overt act is alleged against the petitioner. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned APP further submitted that as per statement of the Prabhat Kumar made in paragraph no. 53 of the case diary, co-accused Santosh Kumar was already having illicit relationship with the Rupa Kumari before she solemnized marriage with the deceased and the petitioner was well acquainted with the said fact and the co-accused has also threatened the deceased of dire consequences if he solemnizes the marriage with Rupa Kumari. Learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State, therefore, jointly prayed that this petitioner does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶20

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as also the material available in the case diary, in my view, this is not a fit case for anticipatory bail, and hence, I am

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14998 of 2025(4) dt.25-07-2025 3/3

¶22

not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶23

Accordingly, the prayer for grant of anticipatory

¶24

bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

¶25

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the same shall be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

¶26

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶27

Alok Verma/-

¶28

U T

Ram Naresh Ray v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Naresh Ray v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Farhan @ Farhan Alam @ Faran Alam Vs The State of Bihar

Nitish Kumar @ Nitesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bittu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Mukesh Rai @ Rakesh Rai @ Mukesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sunaina Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Gautam Kumar @ Gautam Yadav Vs The State of Bihar