Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Shrawan Kumar Chaudhary @ Gorakh Chaudhary @ Shrawan ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
DISMISSED

Holding

The Court upheld its earlier decision and denied regular bail to the petitioner.

Summary

The petitioner, Shrawan Kumar Chaudhary, was arrested on 23 October 2024 with three rifles and 102 cartridges and charged under Sections 337, 338, 340(2), 111, 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023 and Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act. He applied for regular bail, which was previously rejected by the Patna High Court on 19 February 2025, citing the seriousness of the allegations and his continued custody. The petitioner filed a second bail application, arguing that the trial had commenced and seeking relief. The Court, after hearing counsel, noted the gravity of the offences, the fact that the trial was already underway, and found no justification to overturn its earlier order. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed and the trial was directed to be expedited.

Issues considered

  • The petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences.
  • Whether the commencement of trial and the nature of the charges justify denial of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • Arms Act
  • serious offences
  • trial expeditious
  • high court

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43122 of 2025
                          Arising Out of PS. Case No.-983 Year-2024 Thana- BIHTA District- Patna
                 ======================================================
                 Shrawan Kumar Chaudhary @ Gorakh Chaudhary @ Shrawan Chaudhary
                 S/O Late Chandrika Chaudhary Resident Of Village- Raunja, PS- Nagar
                 Thana, Ara, Distt- Bhojpur                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                               Versus
                 The State of Bihar                             ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr. P.N. Sahi, Sr. Advocate
                                                   Mr. Arvind Prasad Singh, Advocate
                 For the State            :        Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
                                       ORAL ORDER

5   10-02-2026                    Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                  2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for

                   grant of bail in connection with S.T. No. 1075 of 2025 arising out of

                   Bihta P.S. Case No. 983 of 2024 registered for the offence under

                   Sections 337, 338, 340(2), 111, 3(5) of the BNS and 25(1-b)a, 26, 35

                   of the Arms Act.

                                  3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner has been

                   rejected by this Court vide order dated 19.02.2025 passed in Cr.

                   Misc. No. 9202 of 2025, which reads as under:

                                                 “Heard learned counsel for the parties.
                                                 2. This application for grant of regular bail
                                    arises out of Bihta P.S. Case No.983 of 2024 registered
                                    for the offence punishable under sections 337, 338,
                                    340(2), 111, 3(5) of the B.N.S. 2023 and under section
                                    25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
                                                 3. The petitioner has been caught with three
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43122 of 2025(5) dt.10-02-2026
                                                         2/2




                                         rifles and 102 cartridges. He is in custody since
                                         23.10.2024.
                                                    4. Considering the nature of allegation
                                         levelled against the petitioner, I am not inclined to
                                         grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail.
                                         Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.”

                                    4. In the trial, the charge has been framed.

                                    5. Considering the gravity of the offence and also the fact

                       that the trial has started, I am not inclined to review my earlier order.

                                    6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

                                    7. The learned trial Judge is directed to expedite the trial.

                                    8. The Superintendent of Police, West, Patna is directed to

                       ensure the appearance of the witnesses in the trial so that the trial is

                       not delayed.

                                    9.    Let a copy of this order be communicated to the

                       Principal District Judge, Patna and the S.S.P., Patna forthwith

                       through FAX or e-mail for its compliance.

                                    10. If the trial is delayed by the prosecution, the petitioner

                       has liberty to move before this Court.



                                                  (Sandeep Kumar, J)
priyanka/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.