Dismissed¶22

Birendra Ram @ Dome v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC17 Jan 2026CR. MISC./78512/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.78512 of 2025, decided 17-01-2026 by Ramesh Chand Malviya, J.: regular bail application of Birendra Ram @ Dome rejected in Buxar Industrial PS Case No. 141 of 2025 (Ss. 318(4), 303(2), 3(5) BNS 2023); grounds - five criminal antecedents (three of same nature), victim identification in Test Identification Parade, custody since 01.09.2025; State opposed through APP.

What did the court decide?

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, materials available on records and submissions made on behalf of learned counsel for the parties, the Court was not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. ¶21

Birendra Ram @ Dome Vs The State of Bihar — Cheating and Forgery | Patna HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78512 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2025 Thana- BUXAR INDUSTRIAL District- Buxar

¶3

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

¶4

Birendra Ram @ Dome S/O Late Sawali Resident of village- Murar, P.S.Murar, District- Buxar

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance :

¶10

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arvind Kumar Pradhan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dr.Mrityunjaya Kr.Gautam, APP ======================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA

¶12

ORAL ORDER

¶13

3 17-01-2026

¶14

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

¶15

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Buxar Industrial P.S Case No. 141 of 2025 from the Court of learned CJM, Buxar registered for the offences punishable under Sections 318(4), 303(2), 3(5) of the B.N.S 2023.

¶16

As per allegation in the FIR, two unknown persons have looted the ornaments and money of the informant.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. It is also submitted that petitioner is in judicial custody since 01.09.2025. It is further submitted that petitioner has got five criminal antecedents as stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78512 of 2025(3) dt.17-01-2026 2/2

¶19

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

¶20

From perusal of the F.I.R., impugned order and case diary, it appears that during investigation accused persons arrested by Investigating Officer and during investigation, Investigating Officer has also conducted Test Identification Parade and victim has identified the petitioner in Test Identification Parade. Petitioner has got total five criminal antecedents in which three of them is of same nature of offence.

¶21

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, materials available on records and submissions made on behalf of learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

¶22

Accordingly, prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

¶23

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J)

¶24

Mayank/-

¶25

U T

Birendra Ram @ Dome v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birendra Ram @ Dome 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

Hareram Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Rupesh Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Md. Javed @ Md. Jawed Vs The State of Bihar

Badal Paswan Vs The State of Bihar

Chandan Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Saurabh Singh @ Bittu @ Saurabh Kumar Singh @ Sawrav Singh Vs The State of Bihar