Patna High Court
Ghanshyam Bhagat @ Shayam Bahadur Kumar @ Shyam BhagatversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The High Court upheld its earlier refusal and dismissed the bail application, finding no ground to grant bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Ghanshyam Bhagat, sought regular bail in a 2013 case under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 13 of the UAPA. Earlier bail applications were rejected on 13.12.2023 and 30.08.2023, and the petitioner argued that the trial had been delayed and he had been in custody since August 2023. The State contended that the trial had commenced, witnesses were being examined, and the offences were grave, involving alleged Naxal connections and large arms recovery. The High Court examined whether there were any fresh grounds to revisit its earlier order and found none, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges and the fact that the trial was underway. Consequently, the Court dismissed the third bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the gravity of offences under the Arms Act, CLA Act and UAPA.
- Whether the delay in trial and continued custody constitute a ground to review the earlier bail denial.
- Whether the High Court can revisit its prior order granting or denying bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 35
- Criminal Law Amendment Act — s. 17
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act — s. 13
Subjects
- bail
- Arms Act
- UAPA
- Naxal
- trial delay
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81138 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-445 Year-2013 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Ghanshyam Bhagat @ Shayam Bahadur Kumar @ Shyam Bhagat S/o
Rameshwar Bhagat @ Parmeshar Bhagat R/V - Thathan Buzurg, PS- Hajipur,
Sadar, Dist- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Anuj Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 09-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the third attempt on behalf of the petitioner
for grant of bail in connection with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No.
445 of 2013 registered for the offence punishable under Sections
25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and Section 17 of the
C.L.A. Act and Section 13 of the U.A.P.A. Act.
3. Earlier the bail applications of the petitioner were
rejected twice vide orders dated 30.08.2023 and 02.08.2024
passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 31730 of 2023 and 51030 of 2024
respectively.
4. The following order was passed on 02.08.2024 in
Cr. Misc. No. 51030 of 2024 which reads as under:
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81138 of 2025(2) dt.09-02-2026
2/3
“Heard learned counsel for the petitioner
and learned APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt for bail of the
petitioner as earlier such prayer was rejected by
order dated 13.12.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 66927 of
2023.
3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection
with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 445 of 2013
registered for the offence punishable under Sections
25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms Act and Section 17
of the C.L.A. Act and Section 13 of the U.A.P.A. Act.
4. The following order was passed on
13.12.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 66927 of 2023 which
reads as under:
“ Heard the learned
counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks
regular bail in a case registered for
the offence under Sections 25(1-b)a,
26 and 35 of the Arms Act and under
Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act and
under Section 13 of the U.A.P.A.
3. As per the prosecution
case, one Lakhindra Paswas was
arrested by the police on 29.12.2013
in the midnight. Lakhindra Paswan
confessed that he is a naxal and fire
arms were kept in his house.
4. Learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner
is in custody since 02.08.2023, he is
quite innocent and has not committed
any offence.
5. Learned A.P.P. has
vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail and has submitted that there was
huge recovery from Lakhindra
Paswan. Petitioner and others were
named by Lakhindra Paswan as
fellow naxals. Petitioner has been
arrested on 02.08.2023.
6. Petitioner is a naxal and
was an absconder, in these
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81138 of 2025(2) dt.09-02-2026
3/3
circumstances, I am not inclined to
grant bail to the petitioner. This
application is dismissed.
7. The Court below is
directed to expedite the trial of the
petitioner.”
5. This Court finds no ground to review
its earlier order dated 13.12.2023.
6. Accordingly, this application stands
dismissed.”
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
since the trial has been delayed and considering the custody, the
petitioner may be granted bail.
6. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the
trial has started and the witnesses have been directed to appear.
7. Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact
that the trial has started, I am not inclined to review my earlier
order.
8. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
9. The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
P. Kumar
U T
Checking your session…