Dismissed¶25

Vinay Ray @ Vinay Prasad Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Jun 2025CR. MISC./9904/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail rejection; regular bail refused; Patna High Court; CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9904 of 2025; decided 24-06-2025; Chandra Prakash Singh J; Vinay Ray @ Vinay Prasad Yadav; Sahpur P.S. Case No. 619 of 2022; District Patna; Sections 307, 302 read with Section 34 IPC; burning/kerosene/burn injury death of informant (wife of petitioner); custody since 07.08.2024; charge-sheet filed; co-accused bail in Cr. Misc. No. 49392 of 2023 dt. 07.08.2023; trial to be concluded expeditiously by Additional Sessions Judge, VII Sub-Divisional Court, Danapur.

What did the court decide?

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the heinous nature of the offence alleged against the petitioner, the court was not inclined to grant bail and rejected the application in respect of Sahpur P.S. Case No. 619 of 2022. ¶23

Vinay Ray @ Vinay Prasad Yadav Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9904 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-619 Year-2022 Thana- SAHPUR District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Vinay Ray @ Vinay Prasad Yadav S/O Sri Nageshwar Ray Resident of Sanrari @ Sarari, P.S.- Shahpur, District- Patna

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Supriya Kumari, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, APP

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA PRAKASH SINGH

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

4 24-06-2025

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

¶15

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Sahpur P.S. Case No. 619 of 2022 dated 14.12.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and the co-accused persons are alleged to have set the informant on fire after pouring kerosene oil and locked the room from outside. Upon her noise, neighbours assembled and the lock of room was broken. Thereafter, she was taken to the hospital where after seven days, she died during the course of treatment.

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9904 of 2025(4) dt.24-06-2025 2/3

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. The charge-sheet has been submitted against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the petitioner was not present at the place of occurrence rather after hearing noise, the petitioner came for rescue of the deceased in which his hand got injured. The mother and brother of the deceased have an affidavit submitted that the petitioner has no role in the alleged occurrence. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent in which he is on bail as stated in para 3 of the bail petition. The petitioner is in custody since 07.08.2024. The co-accused person has already been granted regular bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.08.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 49392 of 2023.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the bail petition of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is the husband of the deceased. It is further submitted that the specific allegation against the petitioner that he regularly used to abuse and assault the deceased on small issues and on the date of incident he was instrumental in burning the deceased. As per para-11 and 12 of the case diary, the witnesses, Jharia Devi and Vikash Kumar have supported the prosecution case. It is further

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9904 of 2025(4) dt.24-06-2025 3/3

¶21

submitted that the cause of the death is due to burn injury.

¶22

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances

¶23

of the case as well as the heinous nature of offence against the petitioner, this court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and the same is rejected in connection with Sahpur P.S. Case No. 619 of 2022, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, VII Sub-Divisional Court, Danapur.

¶24

Learned court below is directed to conclude the trial of the petitioner at the earliest.

¶25

The application stands rejected.

¶26

(Chandra Prakash Singh, J)

¶27

Shivam/-

Vinay Ray @ Vinay Prasad Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Ray @ Vinay Prasad Yadav v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ram Sewak Mahto @ Ramsevak Mahto @ Ram Sewak Bhagat Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Tanti Vs The State of Bihar

Arun Kumar @ Arun Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Surendra Kumar Sharma @ Mol Vs The State of Bihar

Dr. C. S. Tomar @ Chatrasal Singh Tomar Vs The State of Bihar