Lal Saheb Ray v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29179 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-274 Year-2024 Thana- MANER District- Patna ====================================================== Lal Saheb Ray S/o- Ramjasi Ray R/v- Hira Tola Sherpur Ps- Maner DistPatna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ganesh Prasad Yadav, Advocate For the State :

Mr.Prem Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 274 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 02.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 6553 of 2025, which reads as under:

"Re-Cr. Misc. No. 6553 of 2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned counsel for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Maner P.S. Case No. 274 of 2024 registered for the offence under Section

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29179 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 2/3 302, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and others have participated in the killing of the deceased.

4. There are nine cases pending against the petitioner and and earlier the father of the informant was killed and now his uncle has also been killed by the same set of accused persons.

5. In that view of the matter, this application is dismissed.

6. The trial of the petitioner is directed to be expedited.

7. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the informant that the informant is a eighteen year old boy and he was given police protection after the killing of his father as he is an eye witness in that case. Now he is eye witness of killing of his uncle. It has further been submitted that the police protection has been withdrawn two months back.

8. In these circumstances, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna is directed to restore the police protection of the informant till the trial of both the cases is completed.

9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patna through FAX for its compliance."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charges have been framed in the trial.

5. Considering the gravity of the offence, the fact that the trial has started and no fresh ground for grant of bail is made out, I am not inclined to review my earlier order.

6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

7. It is, however, clarified that the observations made

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29179 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 3/3 herein are limited to the adjudication of the present bail application and shall not prejudice the case of the petitioner at any subsequent stage of the trial and this Court has not express any opinion on the merits of the case.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T