Chhapra (Saran): The Supreme Court has set aside three orders of the Patna High Court granting bail in a murder case arising out of election violence in Chhapra in May 2024, after finding that the High Court had failed to consider video footage of the incident and witness statements identifying the accused, LawBeat reported. The Bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu remitted the matters to the High Court for fresh consideration.

Source: LawBeat

The orders set aside had granted anticipatory bail to Kamakhya Singh alias Deepu Singh and regular bail to Ram Pratap Singh alias Ravi Kant Singh and Ramakant Solanki alias Ramakant Singh. The appeals were filed by Nagendra Ray, the father of Chandan Ram, who was allegedly shot dead in the incident. The judgment, in the case titled Nagendra Ray versus State of Bihar and Another, was delivered on October 16, 2026, according to the case details reported by LawBeat and CourtBook.

Source: LawBeat

3Patna HC bail orders set aside
40–50people in the group alleged by the prosecution
May 21, 2024date of the alleged shooting at Bhikhari Chowk

What the prosecution alleges happened in Chhapra

According to the prosecution case reported by LawBeat, on May 20, 2024, during the Lok Sabha elections, some persons allegedly misbehaved with, abused and attempted to attack supporters of an RJD candidate, following which an FIR was registered. The prosecution alleges that, out of resentment, on May 21, 2024, at around 7 am, a group of around 40–50 armed persons, including the three accused, surrounded Chandan Ram and others at Bhikhari Chowk in Chhapra.

Source: LawBeat

Ramakant Solanki allegedly shot Chandan Ram in the chest, while Ram Pratap Singh allegedly shot Manoj Ram in the head; two others, Deepak Kumar and Guddu Kumar, were also allegedly shot at by other assailants, the prosecution said. Chandan Ram was declared dead at the hospital, while the others required medical treatment. An FIR was registered at Town Police Station, Chhapra Nagar, in Saran district under murder and related sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act; a charge sheet has been filed and the trial is pending. These are prosecution allegations, and the accused have not been convicted.

Source: LawBeat

Why the Supreme Court intervened

The Supreme Court noted that the sessions court had refused relief to the accused after referring to the police-obtained video footage and to witness statements recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in which witnesses identified the accused from the footage. In Ram Pratap Singh's case, the footage was recorded as showing him holding a rifle, LawTrend reported. The High Court's orders, however, omitted any consideration of the footage or the witness statements; in Solanki's case it recorded the investigating officer's submission on the footage but gave no independent assessment of its own.

Source: LawTrend

"Merely recording the submissions of the parties without any independent assessment of such submissions is not a proper approach while dealing with applications for bail. Reference to material, however concise they may be, ought to be made to show application of mind. Importantly, it is 'the reasons' which form the backbone of all judicial decisions," the Bench said, as reported by LawBeat and CourtBook.

Source: LawBeat

What is solid

  • The Supreme Court set aside the Patna High Court's anticipatory bail order for Kamakhya Singh and regular bail orders for Ram Pratap Singh and Ramakant Solanki, and sent all three pleas back to the High Court for fresh consideration (LawBeat; LawTrend).
  • The Bench held the High Court had not considered the police video footage or the Section 161 CrPC witness statements identifying the accused, material the sessions court had relied on while refusing relief (LawBeat; LawTrend; CourtBook).
  • The three accused will remain on interim bail, on the conditions earlier imposed by the High Court, until the High Court finally disposes of their applications (LawBeat).

What is only claimed

  • The account of the May 21, 2024 shooting at Bhikhari Chowk — including who allegedly fired at whom — is the prosecution's case; a charge sheet has been filed, the trial is pending, and no accused has been convicted.
  • The Supreme Court expressly clarified that its observations are not findings on the merits of the case, and all parties' submissions remain open before the High Court.

The High Court may list the three applications together for hearing, the Bench said. Awaaz Punjab will update this story when the fresh bail hearing is decided.