Allowed¶20

Chhatilal Ram @ Chhathilal Ram v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC3 Sept 2025CR. MISC./22985/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, CRL.M. No. 22985 of 2025, decided 03-09-2025 by Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra. Bail granted under Section 317(5) Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023; Buxar GRPS Case No. 136 of 2024; recovery of two stolen smart phones from petitioner; judicial custody since 17.08.2024; three criminal antecedents; charge-sheet filed; bail bonds Rs.15,000/- with two sureties of like amount each; State opposed through APP Nirmal Kumar Sinha; petitioner represented by advocate Shashank Shekhar.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court below/concerned Court in connection with Railway Patna Buxar (Buxar GRPS) Case No. 136 of 2024. ¶20

Chhatilal Ram @ Chhathilal Ram Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22985 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2024 Thana- BUXAR RAIL P.S. District- Bhojpur

¶3

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

¶4

Chhatilal Ram @ Chhathilal Ram Son of Umesh Ram Resident of VillageTribuani Sahra, P.S.- Krishnagarh, District-Bhojpur at Ara

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

8 03-09-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Railway Patna Buxar (Buxar GRPS) Case No. 136 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Section 317(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

¶15

As per prosecution case, the police has apprehended the petitioner on spot with two stolen smart phones.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence as alleged against him and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner has three criminal antecedent and is languishing in judicial custody since 17.08.2024 without any rhymes or

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22985 of 2025(8) dt.03-09-2025 2/2

¶18

reason. Charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner in this case.

¶19

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner, stating that the stolen mobiles have been recovered from the possession of the petitioner.

¶20

Having heard rival contention of both the parties and considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case as also taking into account the period of custody of the petitioner, let the petitioner, abovenamed, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Railway Patna Buxar (Buxar GRPS) Case No. 136 of 2024.

¶21

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)

¶22

rishi/-

¶23

U T

Chhatilal Ram @ Chhathilal Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhatilal Ram @ Chhathilal Ram 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

Arun Kumar @ Arun Kumar Rai Vs The State of Bihar

Satyam Jaiswal @ Satya Jaiswal Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Ranjan @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Rana Kumar @ Tunni Singh @ Tunni @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Devendra Prasad Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Shankar Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sunita Devi Vs The State of Bihar