Patna High Court
Ravi Jaiswal @ Ravi Kumar JaiswalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied because, in serious offences such as murder, once the trial has begun, the court should be loath to entertain bail applications absent fresh grounds.
Summary
The appellant, Ravi Jaiswal, was charged under Sections 302, 120(B), 34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act for murder. He applied for regular bail for the second time after an earlier bail plea was rejected. The trial is underway, with half of the prosecution witnesses already examined and the court expecting completion within three months. The State and the informant opposed bail, citing a Supreme Court decision that bail in serious offences should not be entertained once trial has commenced. The Patna High Court, relying on that precedent, rejected the bail application, directing the lower court to expedite the trial and allowing the appellant to re‑apply after three months if the trial is not concluded.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused of murder and related offences after the trial has commenced and prosecution witnesses have been examined.
- Whether the appellant has raised any new ground that would justify granting bail despite the seriousness of the offences.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- trial commencement
- serious offences
- Supreme Court precedent
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1255 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2024 Thana- KATIHAR NAGAR District- Katihar
======================================================
Ravi Jaiswal @ Ravi Kumar Jaiswal S/o- Kishore Prasad Jaiswal R/v- Lal
Kothi Road Ps- Katihar Town Dist- Katihar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Dinesh Paswan S/o- Late Gorelal Paswan R/v- Driver Tola Ps- Katihar Town
Dist- Katihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Himanshu Praveer, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, SPP
For the Informant : Mr. Satish Kumar Sinha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 15-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned SPP
for the State as also learned counsel for the informant.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 29.01.2026, passed by learned District
and Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST
Act, Katihar whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in
connection with Katihar Nagar PS Case No. 141 of 2024 under
Sections 302, 120(B) & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
27 of the Arms Act.
3. This is the second attempt of the appellant for bail.
The appellant has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide order
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1255 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
dated 07.08.2025, passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 2135 of 2025,
taking into account nature and gravity of offence as also there
being ample material against the appellant to show his
involvement in the commission of murder of the deceased.
4. In compliance of the order dated 10.04.2026, a
report dated 04.05.2026, with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that seven (7) out of fourteen (14) prosecution witness
have been examined in this case. It is further reported that trial
is likely to be concluded within a period of three months
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 15.03.2024,
without any rhymes or reason, having five criminal antecedents.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no
likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, hence,
petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
6. Learned SPP for the State and learned counsel for
the Informant opposes the prayer for grant of bail. Learned APP
has further relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court
reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3539 (X. vs. State of
Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein in paragraph No.14, Hon’ble Apex
Court has observed as under:
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1255 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
“14. Ordinarily in
serious offences like rape, murder,
dacoity, etc., once the trial
commences and the prosecution starts
examining its witnesses, the Court be
it the Trial Court or the High Court
should be loath in entertaining the
bail application of the accused.”
7. There is no new ground to consider the bail petition
of the appellant. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the
trial has started.
8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
appellant is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously
preferably within a period of three months from today. If the
trial is not concluded within the period of three months, as
stated above, the appellant will be at liberty to renew his prayer
before the court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.