Ranjan Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2945 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2020 Thana- CHHAURADANO District- East Champaran ====================================================== Ranjan Ray Son of Late Brij Kishore Ray R/v- Laxmipur, Nanhka Tola, Katharia, P.S.- Lakhaura, District- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Md. Shakir Ahmad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 19-04-2023 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Md. Shakir Ahmad, learned APP for the State. This is the second attempt where the petitioner is renewing his prayer for bail in connection with Chhauradano P.S. Case No. 185 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 326, 307, 379 and 384/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Earlier, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 11.07.2022 after considering the specific nature of accusation and gravity of the offence that the petitioner fired upon the brother of the informant, causing grievous firearm injury, apart from the involvement of the petitioner in four other criminal cases besides the present one. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that now
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2945 of 2023(4) dt.19-04-2023 2/2 the charges have been framed and despite bailable warrant issued to the witnesses, none has been produced for examination by the prosecution. As such, there is no likelihood of the conclusion of the trial in near future.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submits that since the prayer of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit, there is no changed circumstance warranting reconsideration. In view of the aforenoted submissions and taking into consideration the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
The prayer for bail is rejected.
However, this Court expects that the learned Trial Court shall take all endeavours to conclude the trial as early as possible.
If there would not be substantive progress in the trial, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months.
(Harish Kumar, J) rohit/- U T