Sanju Ravidas @ Sanjay Ravidas v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14352 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-199 Year-2023 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Sanju Ravidas @ Sanjay Ravidas S/o Rajendra Ravidas R/o VillageAndhana, PS- Noorsarai, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Pramod Kumar Sinha, Adv.
For the State :
Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-04-2025 Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in the provision of law under which the present application has been filed.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S. Tr. No. 42 of 2024 arising out of Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 199 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. As per prosecution case, three unknown persons are said to have concertedly looted E-Rickshaw and mobile phone of the informant and fled away from the place of occurrence.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that bail prayer of the present petitioner has already been rejected by this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14352 of 2025(2) dt.11-04-2025 2/3 Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 7092 of 2024 on 21.06.2024 with an observation that if trial is not concluded within six months from the date of receipt/production of copy of aforesaid order to the concerned court, petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. He further submits that he has filed the present bail petition after eight months from the date of rejection of his previous bail prayer. He further submits that pace of trial is very slow as only one witness has been examined as yet and the said witness has also been declared hostile. He further submits that delay of trial is not in any way attributable to the present petitioner as he is in custody since 08.06.2023. He further submits that petitioner bears criminal antecedent of five cases in which he is on bail.
6. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that bail prayer of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit but he fairly conceded to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that this court while rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner observed that if the trial is not concluded within six months, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody, trial is not likely to be concluded in near future, delay of trial is not in any way attributable to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14352 of 2025(2) dt.11-04-2025 3/3 petitioner, argument advanced on behalf of both sides and also taking into consideration the material available on record, let the petitioner above named 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 learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Nalanda at Biharsharif in connection with S. Tr. No. 42 of 2024 arising out of Noorsarai P.S. Case No. 199 of 2023, subject to following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors shall be either father or mother or sister or brother or wife or the person who has sworn the affidavit in bail application.
(ii) Petitioner will co-operate in trial and will remain present on all dates and absence for two consecutive dates without appropriate permission, would be a ground for cancellation of bail by the learned Trial court itself. (iii) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(Alok Kumar Pandey, J) shahzad/- U T