The Patna High Court rejected a bail application in a murder and arms case where charges were recently framed, citing the need for a speedy trial and prior refusal.
Application for regular bail rejected; liberty to renew prayer after six months if trial does not progress.
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 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.37619 of 2021
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-521 Year-2018 Thana- BARAUNI District- Begusarai
======================================================
Ranjeet Kumar Singh @ Ranjit Kumar @ Ranjeet Singh Son of Late Ramdev Singh @ Ramdev Singh Resident of Village - Keshave, P.S. - Barauni, District - Begusarai.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sandip Kumar Gautam For the Respondents : Mr. Prabhat Kumar Deepak Mr. Yoganand Tiwary Ms. Meena Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER
6 09-03-2022
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for informant who has appeared along with learned APP for the State.
Petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Barauni P.S. Case No. 521 of 2018 registered under Sections 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record a supplementary affidavit to the effect that the charges have been framed by order dated 17.02.2022 (Annexure-4 to the supplementary affidavit).
On earlier occasion, i.e., on 01.12.2020, this Court had rejected the prayer for bail having regard to the allegation
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.37619 of 2021(6) dt.09-03-2022 2/2
against the petitioner of shooting upon the chest of the informant.
In view of the fact that charges have admittedly been framed, this Court is not persuaded to take a different view today and would expect expeditious conclusion of the trial.
Learned counsel for the informant is also present and submits that without seeking any unnecessary adjournment, the informant shall ensure that the trial proceeds expeditiously.
In view of the such submissions, this application is rejected for the present. If the trial does not make any substantial progress and is not concluded, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J)
SUMIT/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the prayer for regular bail in a case involving shooting charges should be allowed considering charges have been framed.
Whether the trial below proceeded expeditiously enough to justify granting bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ranjeet Kumar Singh
The State Of Bihar
Madhuresh Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
