Allowed¶26

Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Rai v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC24 Jun 2026CR. MISC./30907/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.30907 of 2026, decided 24-06-2026 by Justice Praveen Kumar. Bail application under Sections 103(1), 3(5) BNS and Section 27 Arms Act, Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 220 of 2025, Muzaffarpur; deceased Mintu Kumar Sah shot dead near under-construction building of Ajay Kushwaha; informant Brahdev Sah; petitioner Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Rai in custody since 09.12.2025; charge-sheet submitted; bail granted on Rs. 10,000/- bond with two sureties; application allowed.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted to the petitioner on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, in connection with Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 220 of 2025. ¶26

Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Rai Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30907 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-220 Year-2025 Thana- RAMPUR HARI District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

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

¶4

Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Rai S/o- Kailash Rai R/village- Mothahan Fakirana PS- Rampurhari District- Muzaffarpur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Bela Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant : Dr. Bipin Chandra, Adv. ======================================================

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶10

ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 24-06-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P

¶13

for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶14

2 . The petitioner has preferred this application for

¶15

grant of regular bail in connection with Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 220 of 2025 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the B.N.S and Section 27 of Arms Act.

¶16

3. As per the prosecution case, brief fact of the case is that informant Brahdev Sah has alleged on 08.12.2025 at about 7.00 am in the morning his son Mintu Kumar Sah was at the home. In the meantime, Ramesh Rai came to his house and asked the informant to meet with Ajay Kushwaha for taking due amount which he had earlier taken as loan. It has been further

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30907 of 2026(3) dt.24-06-2026 2/4

¶18

alleged that the informant's son had given 2 to 3 lakhs rupees to Ajay Kushwaha but return of payment was being delayed by Ajay Kushwaha and he was saying that he will pay the amount tomorrow or on the other day. On request of Ramesh Rai his son Mintu Kumar went to meet with Ajay Kushwaha at Rupauli, on motorcycle. After sometime, near under construction building of Ajay Kushwaha two unknown persons fired upon Mintu Kumar and shot him dead as a result of which he died on place of occurrence itself. The informant has suspicion that Ajay Kushwaha, Ramesh Kumar with the help of two unknown criminals have committed murder of his son Mintu Kumar Sah by causing bullet injuries.

¶19

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It has further been submitted that as per the FIR two unknown persons had called the deceased who were riding on a separate motor cycle. It has further been submitted that the case of last seen has been projected after the death of the deceased. It has been further been submitted that there is no eye witness of alleged occurrence of murder. It has further been submitted that petitioner ought to have been made a witness in this case. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has got no association

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30907 of 2026(3) dt.24-06-2026 3/4

¶21

with co-accused Ajay Kushwaha. It has further been submitted that the confessional statement of the petitioner before police while in police custody has no evidentiary value in the eye of law and has not let to recover of any incriminating article. It has also been submitted that the charge sheet has been submitted against the petitioner and there is no allegation of tempering with the evidence against him. Lastly, it has been submitted that the petitioner has got one criminal antecedent but not of similar nature and he is in custody since 09.12.2025.

¶22

5 . Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant has further submitted that petitioner took active participation in the commission of the offence and there are strong materials against him.

¶23

6 . Heard the parties and perused the record.

¶24

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner above-named, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court concerned, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Rampurhari P.S. Case No. 220 of 2025.

¶25

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30907 of 2026(3) dt.24-06-2026 4/4

¶26

8. The application stands allowed.

¶27

(Praveen Kumar, J)

¶28

Sahil/-

¶29

U T

Ramesh Kumar @ Ramesh Rai v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Kumar @ 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

Jagat Pal Singh @ Jagat Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Suresh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar through the S P Vigilance (Spl.)

Manawar Fatma @ Manawar Fatima Vs The State of Bihar

Sajan kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Fulamati Devi @ Fulmati Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Ramchandra Sah Vs The State of Bihar