Suraj Ram Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Niranjan Parihar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 26-02-2026

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

¶13

APP for the State.

¶14

The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 140(2), 3(5) and 61(2) of B.N.S.

¶15

The case of the prosecution is that the younger brother of the informant Devashish Ganguly @ Bablu has gone to fetch milk from the house of Sahdev Yadav. When he did not return, the informant called to one of the neighbourers of Sahdev Yadav, namely, Pintu Rajak who informed that his younger brother has proceeded fifteen minutes ago. After that, the informant started searching his brother. One Sonu Yadav disclosed that his younger brother has been abducted by some unknown miscreants on a CNG Toto. One Bipin Ravidas was

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91278 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026 2/3

¶17

found wondering near the place of occurrence.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that during course of investigation and he has given his statement under Section 183 of the BNSS wherein he has not named this petitioner rather he has not named any of the accused persons as his eyes were closed with cloth. During investigation, the name of this petitioner has surfaced on the basis of confessional statement of one Udit Yadav. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on this basis, the petitioner has been named in this case. Save and except this, there is nothing against him. Moreover, the petitioner is having no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in judicial custody since 28.08.2025. It has further been submitted that Manish Kumar has been granted bail by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 80270 of 2025. The case of this petitioner stands on similar footing.

¶19

Learned APP appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer of regular bail.

¶20

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.91278 of 2025(3) dt.26-02-2026 3/3

¶22

petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with Jhajha P.S. Case No. 416 of 2025 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Jamui.

¶23

(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶24

durgesh/-

¶25

U T

Suraj Ram v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Ram 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Rahul Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Bittu Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sumitra Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Ankit Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Lal Bihari Singh Vs The State of Bihar