Patna High Court – Orders
Binod Ram @ Vinod Ram @ Golu Ram vs The State Of Bihar on 29 July, 2026
Author: Khatim Reza
Bench: Khatim Reza
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 50569 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-158 Year-2022 Thana- SASARAM MUFFSIL District- Rohtas
======================================================
Binod Ram @ Vinod Ram @ Golu Ram S/o Harihar Ram Resident of
Village- Dhankadha, Police Station- Sasaram (M) (Daudadh O.P.), Dist.-
Rohtas
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Kamla Kant Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-07-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with
Sasaram(M) (Dhaudadh O.P.) P.S. Case No. 158 of 2022, dated
06.04.2022, instituted for the offences punishable under
Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 379, 307, 504 and 506 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
3. The allegation is that the petitioner along with
other accused persons entered the informant’s house, abused and
assaulted the informant and her family members and made
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50569 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026
2/5
caste-based remarks. It is further alleged that co-accused
Shankar Ram fired at the informant’s son, causing a gunshot
injury to his leg and also caused a gunshot injury to the
informant’s right hand when she intervened. It is also alleged
that the accused persons confined and assaulted the family
members and looted jewellery worth Rs. 5 lakh in retaliation for
an earlier dispute between the children.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the
present case. Learned counsel further submits that the specific
allegation of firing is against co-accused Shankar Ram, who is
alleged to have fired at the informant’s son. Although an
allegation of firing has been made, no firearm injury is available
on record. It is also submitted that the petitioner’s Bhabhi had
lodged an F.I.R. regarding the same occurrence on 04.04.2022,
whereas the present F.I.R. was lodged on 06.04.2022, after a
delay of two days and without any plausible explanation, as a
counterblast to the earlier case. Further submission is that no
specific allegation of theft or assault nor any specific overt act,
has been attributed to the petitioner and that the allegations
against him are general and omnibus in nature. It is further
submitted that except for Sections 379 and 307 of the Indian
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50569 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026
3/5
Penal Code, the remaining offences are bailable and that
Sections 379 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code were
subsequently added without any material available on record. It
is further submitted that no alleged stolen article has been
recovered either from the petitioner’s house or from his physical
or conscious possession. According to learned counsel, a scuffle
had taken place between the informant, petitioner and other co-
villagers, who are next-door neighbours, and the occurrence did
not take place in the manner alleged in the First Information
Report. Lastly, it is submitted that two criminal cases are
pending against the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the
prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case, particularly the general and omnibus nature of the
allegations against the petitioner, the absence of any specific
overt act attributed to him, the fact that no alleged stolen article
has been recovered from his possession, and the specific
allegation of firing being against co-accused Shankar Ram, this
Court is inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to
the petitioner.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50569 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026
4/5
petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender
before the court below within a period of six weeks from
today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.
10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Sasaram, Rohtas, in connection with Sasaram (M)
(Dhaudadh O.P.) P.S. Case No. 158 of 2022, subject to the
conditions laid down under Section 482 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 and further that (i) that the
petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly
represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and on
his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason,
his bail bond shall be cancelled by the court below, (ii) that one
of the bailors will be his own blood relation, preferably father,
mother, brother, sister and or his wife, (iii) that the bailor shall
also state on affidavit that he will inform the court concerned if
the petitioner is made accused in any other case of similar
nature after his release in the present case and thereafter the
court below will be at liberty to initiate the proceeding for
cancellation of bail on ground of misuse, and (iv) that if the
petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that
case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50569 of 2026(2) dt.29-07-2026
5/5
of bail.
8. The application stands allowed.
(Khatim Reza, J)
shyambihari/-
U
