Ramesh Rai Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 61554 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Jha, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar Shrivastava, APP (In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 61651 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sudha, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Uday Pratap Singh, APP

¶28

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61554 of 2025(3) dt.10-12-2025 2/3

¶29

(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 65401 of 2025) For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sudha, Adv For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP ======================================================

¶30

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

¶31

ORAL ORDER

¶32

3 10-12-2025

¶33

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶34

APP for the State.

¶35

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Bypass P.S Case No. 279 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 317(4), 317(5), 303(2), 3(5) of the BNS Act and Section 11(1), (a),(b), (c), (I), (k) of Cruelty ot Animal Act and Section 47(a), 48, 49(a)(b), 50, 54(a)(b)(c), 56 of the Transportation of Animal Rule, 1978.

¶36

As per allegation in the FIR, altogether 22 animals were being transported to West Bengal including cow, buffalo and calf in two vehicle bearing registration No. BR-01GN-4886 and Vehicle bearing Registration no. BR-31GC-3576.

¶37

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He next submits that all the animals were purchased by different persons from Animal Market, Madhaul as disclosed in the FIR and one Suresh Rai, Dinesh Rai, Raj Ballabh Rai, Ajay Kumar, Suresh Rai, Jitendra Rai, Arun singh, Munna Kumar, Dinesh Singh sold the cattle (cow) and the purchasers were the resident of Fatuha

¶38

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61554 of 2025(3) dt.10-12-2025 3/3

¶39

under Patna District Loaded the cattle in the two pickup Van. Moreover, no complaint has been registered for any type of theft of animals. It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 30.05.2025 having one antecedent.

¶40

However, learned APP for the State oppose the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

¶41

On perusal of the FIR, case diary and the impugned order dated 24.07.2025, it appears that all the animals were purchased from Madhaul Animal Market in Vaishali District and all receipt of sale and purchase of animal is on record. So, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the above named all the petitioners in all the case mentioned above be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM, Patna City, Patna in connection with Bypass P.S Case No. 279 of 2025.

¶42

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

¶43

Sunnykr/-

¶44

U

Ramesh Rai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Rai 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

Satrughna Prasad Singh Vs Shiv Shankar Prasad Singh

M/s Bharti Construction Vs The State of Bihar

Suresh Rai Vs Prabhu Nath Rai

Raj Kumar @ Butta Paswan @ Raj Kumar Paswan @ Buta Vs The State of Bihar

Ravi Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rajeev Kumar Vs The State of Bihar