Patna High Court
Ravindra KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted given the grave nature of the offences and the ongoing trial.
Summary
The petitioner, Ravindra Kumar, was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, with a recovered country‑made pistol and live cartridges, and is already facing 23 similar serious cases. He applied for regular bail for the second time after his earlier bail plea was rejected on 18‑06‑2025. The trial court noted that only two of six witnesses had been examined and emphasized the gravity of the offences and the petitioner’s continued custody since 20‑02‑2025. The High Court, after hearing counsel, found no merit in revisiting its earlier decision, citing the seriousness of the charges and the progress of the trial. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed and the trial was directed to be expedited.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences under the Arms Act
- Whether the progress of the trial and the number of witnesses examined justify denial of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 35
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- criminal procedure
- serious offence
- trial progress
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.6571 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-63 Year-2025 Thana- RAJAPAKAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Ravindra Kumar Son of Arvind singh @ Arvind Kumar Singh Resident of
village- Khilwat, Ps- Bidupur, Dist- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhubala Verma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Ms. Asha Devi, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The defect(s) as pointed out by the Stamp Reporter
are ignored.
3. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner
for grant of bail in connection with Rajapakar P.S. Case No.63
of 2025, registered for the offence under Sections 25(1-B)(a),
26, 35 of Arms Act.
4. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been
rejected vide order dated 18.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc.
No.37238 of 2025, which reads as under:-
“Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. This application for grant of regular bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.6571 of 2026(2) dt.09-02-2026
2/2
arises out of Rajapakar P.S. Case No.63 of 2025
registered for the offence punishable under sections
25(1-b), a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. There is recovery of one country made
pistol and live cartridges from the petitioner, who is
accused in 23 more similar and serious criminal
cases. The petitioner in in custody since 20.02.2025.
4. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not
inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular
bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. The
trial court is directed to expedite the trial and
conclude the same as early as possible.”
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in
the trial, out of six witnesses, two witnesses have been
examined.
6. Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact
that the trial has proceeded, I am not inclined to review my
earlier order.
7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
mdrashid/-
U T
Checking your session…