Dismissed¶21

Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC6 Jul 2026CR. MISC./42641/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: bail refusal; regular bail denied; rape accusation; pregnancy; promise/refusal to marry; victim statement under Section 183 BNSS; Sections 115(2)/127(2)/64 Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023; Mokama P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025; FIR dated 07.07.2025; custody since 25.02.2026; trial pending A.C.J.M-III Barh, Patna; Patna High Court Cr. Misc. No.42641 of 2026; Rajesh Kumar Verma, J.; petitioner Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan; State of Bihar; APP Amitesh Kumar; counsel Priyanka Singh.

What did the court decide?

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Mokama P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025, pending before A.C.J.M-III, Barh, Patna. ¶20

Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan Vs The State of Bihar — Patna HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42641 of 2026

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-283 Year-2025 Thana- MOKAMAH District- Patna

¶3

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

¶4

Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan S/o Vijay Ranjan R/O - Jakhraj Sthan, Ward No-19, P.S - Mokama, District - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Priyanka Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amitesh Kumar, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER

¶11

2 06-07-2026

¶12

HeardMs. Priyanka Singh, learned counsel for the

¶13

petitioner and Mr. Amitesh Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 25.02.2026 in connection with Mokama P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025, FIR dated 07.07.2025 registered for the offence under Section 115(2), 127(2) and 64 of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

¶15

According to the prosecution case, the informant alleged that the petitioner forcibly committed rape with her due to which she became pregnant and when the informant asked the petitioner to marry her, he refused to do so.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case and the petitioner is

¶17

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42641 of 2026(2) dt.06-07-2026 2/2

¶18

rotting in judicial custody since 25.02.2026.

¶19

Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the petitioner's prayer for bail and submitted that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 183 of the BNSS, wherein she categorically stated that the petitioner had committed rape upon her. It was further submitted that, as a consequence of the aforesaid act of the petitioner, the victim became pregnant.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Mokama P.S. Case No. 283 of 2025, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M-III, Barh, Patna.

¶21

Prayer is refused.

¶22

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)

¶23

Suruchi/-

¶24

U T

Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan 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

Amit Shankar Sharma Vs The State of Bihar

Dinesh Shah Vs The State of Bihar

Baljit Vs The State of Bihar

Aakash Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rupesh Kumar @ Andwa Vs The state of bihar

Sanjay Kumar Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar