Arnav Shaurya @ Ravi v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90325 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2020 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Arnav Shaurya @ Ravi Son of Ashok Vishawkarma @ Ashok Vishawkarma R/o - Line Par Mirzapur, Nawada, Near Surya Mandir, P.S - Nawada, District - Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner to obtain regular bail in connection with Laheri P.S. Case No. 77 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 324, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He is in custody since 18.06.2020 having one criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph '3' of the application.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged that his younger son was studying in Biharsharif and was living in the house of one Bhanu Kumar. The informant further alleged that he got information on his mobile that his son has been shot at by accused persons and has been taken to Sadar Hospital,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90325 of 2025(2) dt.26-02-2026 2/3 Biharsharif. He reached hospital and found the dead body of his son. Police collected mobile location and after obtaining call details of the deceased, the name of the petitioner namely, Arnav Shaurya and one other accused was revealed. The informant has further alleged that the cause of occurrence is dispute relating to land and son of the informant was being threatened by the FIR named accused persons.
4. Earlier, vide order dated 01.11.2021 in Cr. Misc. No. 19439 of 2021, this Court had rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner after looking into the materials present in the case diary and the CDR analysis of the mobile phone of the petitioner and the deceased as also the fact that from the possession of the petitioner, a pistol and 17 live cartridges have been recovered by police.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out of 15 prosecution witnesses, 13 have already been examined.
6. Learned APP for the State submits that since the trial itself is at the fag end of the conclusion, considering the seriousness of the allegations and the materials present on the record, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of bail.
7. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances of the case, considering the kind of materials on the record and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90325 of 2025(2) dt.26-02-2026 3/3 that the trial itself is likely to be concluded very soon, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. The trial court is directed to proceed with the trial keeping in view the recent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of The Central Bureau of Investigation Vs. Mir Usman @ Ara @ Mir Usman Ali passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 969 of 2025 and conclude the trial as early as possible.
9. This application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) rishik/- U T