Patna High Court
Ranjeet Singh @ Ranjeet KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied as there was no fresh ground and the trial was already at an advanced stage.
Summary
The appellant, Ranjeet Singh, was charged under Sections 302, 120B, 34 of the IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act for a murder case (PS Case No. 401 of 2024). He had been in judicial custody since June 2024 and filed an appeal against the trial court’s order rejecting his bail petition. The High Court noted that the trial was at an advanced stage with charges framed and six of eight witnesses already examined, and found no fresh ground to revisit the bail decision. Consequently, the court rejected the bail application, directing the lower court to expedite the trial within one month, and dismissed the appeal. The appellant was permitted to renew his bail plea if the trial was not concluded within the stipulated period.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the appellant at an advanced stage of trial despite earlier rejection.
- Whether any fresh ground exists to reconsider the bail application.
- Whether the nature of the offences under the IPC, Arms Act and SC/ST Act precludes bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 34
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- IPC
- Arms Act
- SC/ST Act
- trial delay
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4592 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-401 Year-2024 Thana- ARA NAWADA District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Ranjeet Singh @ Ranjeet Kumar Son of Krishna Singh @ Krishana Singh R/o
Village- Bhusaula (Bhushahula), P.S.- Barahara, District- Bhojpur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Budhan Paswan Son of Ramdev Ram R/o Village- Bahiro, P.S.- Ara
Nawada, District-Bhojpur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Diwakar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, SPP
For the Informant : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State. None appears on behalf
of the informant despite notice being validly served.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 09.10.2025 passed by learned 1 st
Additional Sessions Judge cum Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
Bhojpur at Ara whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant in
connection with Ara Nawada P.S. Case No. 401 of 2024 under
Sections 302, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of
the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. Earlier vide order dated 03.03.2025 passed in Cr.
Appeal (SJ) No. 4949 of 2024, regular bail of the appellant was
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4592 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
rejected by this Court considering the material against the
appellant in the case diary.
4. In compliance of the order dated 21.11.2025 a
report dated 02.12.2022 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that charges have already been framed. It is further
reported that there are eight charge-sheeted witnesses and out of
which, six witnesses have been examined including the
informant.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the
appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 21.06.2024
without any rhymes or reason.
6. Learned SPP for the State opposes the prayer for grant
of bail.
7. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition
of the appellant. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the
trial is going on and is at an advance stage.
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 as expeditiously as
possible, preferably within a period of one month from today. If
the trial is not concluded within the period of one month, as
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4592 of 2025(4) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
stated above, the appellant will be at liberty to renew his prayer
before the learned court below.
9. Accordingly, the present appeal is dismissed.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.