Rajeev Ranjan Singh @ Bacchan Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53581 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2024 Thana- DHARHARA District- Munger ====================================================== Rajeev Ranjan Singh @ Bacchan Singh S/O Late Shambhu Singh @ Shambhu Prasad Singh R/O Vill.- Mohanpur, P.s.- Dharahara, Dist.- Munger. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Dharahra P.S. Case No. 01 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 324, 302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 18.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 63204 of 2024 taking into account the nature of accusation against the petitioner and the gravity of the offence.

4.

In compliance of the order dated 09.01.2026, a report dated 21.01.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53581 of 2025(5) dt.26-02-2026 2/2 appears that charge has been framed against the petitioner on 11.09.2025. Thereafter the case is pending at the stage of prosecution evidence. No any witness has been examined in this case. It is further reported that the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of six months.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 05.01.2024 without any rhymes or reason and has got one criminal antecedent in which he is on bail.

6.

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 7.

There is no new ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the trial is going on.

8.

In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of four months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of four months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T