Patna High Court
Avinash Kumar @ RayfalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The bail petition was dismissed as there was no new ground to alter the earlier decision.
Summary
Avinash Kumar was charged under multiple serious offences, including sections 342, 326, 307, 302, 120B of the IPC, Section 27 of the Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v)(va) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. He had been in judicial custody since July 2024 and had previously applied for bail, which was rejected by the trial court and once before by this High Court. The appellant filed a second bail petition, arguing that he had no other criminal antecedents except one pending case on bail. The State opposed, noting that the trial was at an advanced stage with seven of eleven prosecution witnesses already examined. The High Court found no new material or ground to revisit the earlier decision, rejected the bail application again, and directed the trial court to complete the trial within one and a half months, allowing a fresh bail petition thereafter.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the appellant at the present advanced stage of a serious criminal trial.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 307, 326, 342
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(2)(v)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- trial stage
- serious offences
- SC/ST Act
- Arms Act
- IPC
- high court
- appeal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4771 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-127 Year-2024 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna
======================================================
Avinash Kumar @ Rayfal S/O Late Subodh Singh R/O- Vill-Shivnagar Nur
Mohamadpur, P.S- Parsa Bazar, Distt- Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sameer S/O Late Sarwanand Singh R/O Vill.- Barhiya Kol, P.S- Punpun,
Dist.- Patna . At present R/O- Vill-Shivnagar Nur Mohamadpur, P.S- Parsa
Bazar, Distt- Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mrs. Priyanka Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, APP
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Indrajeet Kumar, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 05-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned SPP
for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 10.11.2025 passed by learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Civil Court (Sadar), Patna whereby
the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Punpun
P.S. Case No. 127 of 2024 under Sections 342, 326, 307, 302,
120B of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 27 of the
Arms Act and Section 3(2)(v)(va) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. This is the second attempt of the appellant for bail.
The appellant has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4771 of 2025(3) dt.05-02-2026
2/3
which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
19.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5220 of 2024 taking into
account the nature and gravity of the offence alleged as also the
trial being commenced and is already in progress.
4. In compliance of the order dated 16.12.2025, a
report dated 06.01.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that out of 11 prosecution witnesses, seven witnesses
have been examined in this case. It is further reported that last
witness has been examined on 10.11.2025 and after that no other
witness has been produced.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 27.07.2024
without any rhymes or reason and has got one criminal
antecedent in which he is on bail.
6. Learned SPP for the State and learned counsel for
the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of
bail to the appellant. Learned counsel for the informant
submitted that the trial is in progress and except I.O., all the
witnesses have been examined in this case.
7. There is no new ground to consider the bail petition
of the appellant. From the aforesaid report and submission of
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4771 of 2025(3) dt.05-02-2026
3/3
learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, 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 preferably within a
period of one and a half month from today. If the trial is not
concluded within the period of one and a half month, as stated
above, the appellant will be at liberty to renew his prayer before
the court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…