Patna High Court rejected the appellant's renewed prayer for bail in a CrPC case, finding no fresh ground for reconsideration despite the appellant's submission regarding the timing of charge framing, thus maintaining the bail denial.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINALAPPEAL (SJ) No.3469 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-92 Year-2021 Thana- KOTWA District- East Champaran
====================================================== RAUSHAN KUMAR @ RAUSHAN YADAV SON OF LAKSHAMAN RAY @ LAKSHAMAN YADAV R/O VILLAGE- DIPAU, P.S.- KOTWA, DISTT.EAST CHAMPARAN, THROUGH HIS FATHER/GUARDIANLAKSHAMAN RAY @ LAKSHAMAN YADAV, R/O VILLAGE- DIPAU, P.S.- KOTWA, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN
| The State of Bihar | Versus | ... ... Appellant/s |
|---|---|---|
| =============== | ======================== | ... ... Respondent/s =============== |
| Appearance : For the Appellant/s |
: Mr. Abhishek Kumar |
|
| For the Respondent/s =============== |
: Mr. Abhay Kumar ======================== |
=============== |
| CORAM: HONOU | RABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIN ORAL ORDER |
D SRIVASTAVA |
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.
The appellant has earlier preferred the Cr. Appeal for setting aside the order dated 22.11.2021 passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Champaran at Motihari in Children Trial No. 14 of 2021 arising out of Kotwa P.S. Case No. 92 of 2021, which was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 21.07.2022 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 4936 of 2021.
Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the fresh ground on which the appellant has renewed his prayer for bail is that in the instant case, the charge has been
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.3469 of 2022(4) dt.16-11-2022 2/2
framed on 05.08.2022, as contained in Annexure-4 to the memo of appeal. He further submits that the appellant is in custody since 28.04.2021.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State opposed the submissions of the learned counsel for the appellant by contending that there is no fresh ground in the present case to enlarge the appellant on bail. Further he contended that earlier no liberty was given to the appellant to renew his prayer for bail on framing of charge.
Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced on behalf of the State, this Court does not find any fresh ground for reconsideration of the prayer for bail of the appellant. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the appellant is rejected.
(Arvind Srivastava, J)
shailendra/-
U T
3 issues framed by the court
Whether any fresh ground exists to reconsider and grant bail to the appellant who is already in custody?
Whether the prayer for bail based on the same facts can be allowed after previous dismissal?
Whether bail should be granted given the absence of new material or ground?
Raushan Kumar @ Raushan Yadav (Son of Lakshaman Ray)
The State of Bihar
Arvind Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
