Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11364/2026dismissed

Hari Shankar Rai v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-23Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11364 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-827 Year-2023 Thana- MANER District- Patna ====================================================== Hari Shankar Rai Son of Khiladi Ray @ Khelari Rai R/V - Sadikkpur Bagicha, P.S. - Maner, Dist. - Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 23-02-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 827 of 2023, registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 307, 302, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 02.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 9291 of 2025, which reads as follows:- "Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner; learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 827 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11364 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026 2/2 under Sections 341, 323, 307, 302, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. The petitioner is the assailant of the deceased. He is in custody since 19.11.2023.

4. Learned APP appearing for the State and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

5. Considering the fact that the petitioner is the assailant of the deceased, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6.Accordingly, the application stands dismissed."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submist that out of 8 witnesses, 4 witnesses have been examined.

5. Considering the gravity of offence, this Court finds no ground to review its earlier order. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands rejected. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Ranjeet/- U T