Ramesh Hembram @ Badal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22725 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-51 Year-2019 Thana- CHANDRAMANDI District- Jamui ====================================================== Ramesh Hembram @ Badal Son of Jetha Hembram @ Bhola Hembram Resident of Village- Dhobatiya, P.S.- Barhat, Distt.- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Satya Prakash Parasar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-04-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. Earlier the regular bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 08.04.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 65862 of 2023 (Annexure- P-14). The present is the second application for regular bail filed on behalf of the petitioner.

3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Chandramandi P.S. Case No. 51 of 2019, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 25(1-B)(a) and 26 of the Arms Act.

4. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that charge has already been framed against the petitioner and out of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22725 of 2025(2) dt.11-04-2025 2/2 nine charge-sheeted witnesses, five witnesses have already been examined. It is further mentioned that the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of six months.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court does not find any fresh ground to revisit the matter which is already decided by this Court on merit. This Court would further take note of the fact that the petitioner is in custody since 12.10.2022. Accordingly, taking into account the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and specifically keeping in view the report of the trial Court, this Court at this stage is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial expeditiously. However, if the trial is not concluded within a period of five months from the date of receipt/production, the petitioner will have liberty to renew his prayer for bail in the Court below.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T