Patna High CourtCR. MISC./44975/2025dismissed

Raushan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-08-01Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44975 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2024 Thana- HIRAMMA P.S. District- Sheohar ====================================================== Raushan Kumar S/o- Virendra Rai Village- Nimahi, P.S- Hiramma, DistSheohar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Jeetendra Narayan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-08-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 01.10.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 64892 of 2024.

3. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence under Sections 341, 324, 326, 307, 379, 511, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and later on, Section 302 of the IPC was added.

4. The following order was passed on 01.10.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 64892 of 2024:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Hiramma P.S. Case No. 19 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 324, 326, 307,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44975 of 2025(2) dt.01-08-2025 2/3 379, 511, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and later on, Section 302 of the IPC is added.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner while trying to commit theft in the temple, is said to have trapped the victim. The victim died subsequently.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2024.

5. Learned APP appearing for the State opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner and therefore, the present bail application is hereby rejected.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2024 but in the trial, out of 6 witnesses, only 3 witnesses have been examined and from 25.04.2025, not even a single witness has been examined.

6. Considering the allegations levelled against the petitioner and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of X Vs. State of Rajasthan and Anr., 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is hereby dismissed.

7. However, the Superintendent of Police, Sheohar is directed to ensure the attendance of the witnesses in the Trial on the dates fixed and the Trial Judge is also directed to expedite

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44975 of 2025(2) dt.01-08-2025 3/3 the trial. He will not grant unnecessary adjournment to the prosecution.

8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Sheohar & the Superintendent of Police, Sheohar through FAX for its compliance forthwith.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T