Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10373/2026dismissed

Ravi Shekhar Rana @ Lallu Kumar @ Ravishekhar Rana@Lalu Ram v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-16Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10373 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2024 Thana- RAMGARH District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Ravi Shekhar Rana @ Lallu Kumar @ Ravishekhar Rana@Lalu Ram S/O Shivshankar Ram @ Devmuni Ram R/O Village- Mansurpur, P.S.- Durgawati, District- Kaimur At Bhabua ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Tribhuwan Narayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Mithlesh Kumar Khare,APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 16-02-2026 Heard the parties.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Durgawati P.S. Case No. 100 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 21.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 57558 of 2024 which reads as under:- Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the O.P. No. 02.

2 . The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Durgawati P.S. Case No. 100 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3 . As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is accused of killing the deceased with co-accused Sonu and others.

4 . Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the deceased was engaged in selling of Heroine etc.,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10373 of 2026(2) dt.16-02-2026 2/2 and because of which lumpen elements used to visit his place and he was found dead. The petitioner is in custody since 01.04.2024.

5 . Learned A.P.P. for the State and the learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the deceased has been killed by cutting his neck in a brutal manner. During investigation, it has come that the petitioner along with Sonu have killed the deceased because of financial dispute.

6 . The learned counsel for the informant has undertaken produce the witnesses on the date fixed and has submitted that the prosecution will not delay the trial.

7 . Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is dismissed. The court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner.

8 . If the trial is delayed by the prosecution then the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the trial is progressing and till now eight witnesses have been examined.

4. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court finds no ground to review its earlier order.

5. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again. (Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T