Ravi @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan @ Karu Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4862 of 2025

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-695 Year-2023 Thana- JAKKANPUR District- Patna

======================================================

Ravi @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan @ Karu, Son of Pramod Prasad, R/o- Mohallah - Bigrahpur, P.S - Jakkanpur, District - Patna

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Kamlesh Prasad, Yadav, Adv. Mr. Indradeo Yadav, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶8

3 25-04-2025

¶9

Heard Mr. Kamlesh Prasad Yadav, learned counsel for

¶10

the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶11

The petitioner seeks regular bail, who is in custody in connection with Jakkanpur P.S. Case No. 695 of 2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶12

This is the second attempt made on behalf of the petitioner, as earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner came to be rejected by this Court vide order dated 18.09.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 48483 of 2024, considering the long list of criminal antecedent as also the allegation of causing firearm

¶13

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4862 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025 2/4

¶14

injury over the leg of the victim.

¶15

Learned Advocate for the petitioner has contended that since the prayer of the petitioner has already been turned down on merit; hence, he is not making any submission on the merit of the case. However, while refusing the prayer for bail of the petitioner, a liberty was accorded to him to renew his prayer of bail after framing of the charge(s). It is the specific contention of the learned Advocate for the petitioner that the charges have already been framed against the petitioner; in this respect, an averment has been made in para-13 of the bail application. Hence, the present application.

¶16

On the other hand, learned Advocate for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the petitioner bears nine criminal antecedent over his head and moreover there is specific allegation of causing firearm injury.

¶17

Having heard the learned Advocate for the respective parties and after going through the status report dated 04.02.2025, it clearly suggests that charges have already been framed and now the witnesses are being examined by the Trial Court. It is also the fact that the petitioner is in custody for over a period of one year and he undertakes that he shall ensure his presence on each and every date of trial.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4862 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025 3/4

¶19

Considering the aforesaid facts and the observations made by this Court, let the petitioner, named above, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VIII, Patna in connection with Jakkanpur P.S. Case No. 695 of 2023, subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be the close relatives of the petitioner with further conditions which are as follows:-

¶20

(i) The petitioner will cooperate in conclusion of

¶21

the trial.

¶22

(ii) He will remain present on each and every date of trial till disposal of the case.

¶23

(iii) He will not try to tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witnesses to delay the disposal of trial.

¶24

(iv) In the event of default of two consecutive dates without any cogent reason, his bail bonds will liable to be cancelled.

¶25

(v) The court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and, in case, at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take immediate step for cancelling the bail

¶26

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4862 of 2025(3) dt.25-04-2025 4/4

¶27

bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds, in terms of the above-mentioned order, shall not be delayed for this purpose or in the name of verification.

¶28

(Harish Kumar, J)

¶29

rohit/-

¶30

U T

Ravi @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan @ Karu v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi @ Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan Kumar @ Ravi Ranjan @ Karu v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Veena Devi, Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Kumar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Sheoji Prasad Vs The State of Bihar

Ashish Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Ajay Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Anand Thakur @ Anand Kumar Thakur Vs The State of Bihar