Ranjay Ram @ Ranjay Kumar Ram Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39690 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2024 Thana- RAMGARHWA District- East Champaran

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

Ranjay Ram @ Ranjay Kumar Ram S/o Rajendra Ram @ Imran Dewan R/o Vill.- Murla, PS- Ramgarhwa, Distt.- East Champaran At present Resident of village- Champapur, P.S.- Ramgarhwa, District- East Champaran

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ajay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sangeeta Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶9

ORAL ORDER

¶10

3 15-11-2025

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶12

A.P.P for the State.

¶13

2. The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Ramgarhwa P.S. Case No. 3 of 2024 dated 09.01.2024 registered for the offences punishable u/ss 302, 120B read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/ss 25(1-B)(a), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.

¶14

3. As per the prosecution case, on 08.01.2024, a Chhatiyar ceremony was going on in the neighbouring house of the informant, in the meantime, the accused Ranjay Ram (petitioner) and Manjay Ram came to the house of the informant and they took away the informant’s son Guddu Kumar forcefully. A dance programme was also going on at the gate of

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39690 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 2/3

¶16

the co-accused, Shanti Devi and many people were called by the co-accused, Shanti Devi and they were watching dance programme after taking meal. It is further alleged that the petitioner, Ranjay Ram fired on the informant’s son who sustained gunshot injury on his back. Thereafter, the informant took his son to the hospital where the doctor declared him dead.

¶17

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The informant is not the eyewitness to the alleged occurrence. Nothing has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. The petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 04.02.2025.

¶18

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the bail petition of the petitioner. The specific allegation of firing on the informant’s son is against the petitioner, Ranjay Ram. As per para, 8, 9, 10, and 11, it is apparent that the petitioner and his brother Manjay Ram took the deceased with them forcibly. As per the post-mortem report of the deceased, the cause of death is shock and hemorrhage due to vital organ injuries, caused by firearm.

¶19

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39690 of 2025(3) dt.15-11-2025 3/3

¶21

of the case as well as the heinous nature of allegation against the

¶22

petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶23

7. The application stands rejected.

¶24

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)