Patna High Court
Chhotu RamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied as there were no fresh grounds, and the trial was ordered to be expedited within six months.
Summary
The petitioner, Chhotu Ram, was charged under IPC sections 302, 120B, 34 and Arms Act sections 25(1‑b)(a), 26, 27, 35. He had been in judicial custody since 13 July 2024 and earlier sought regular bail, which was rejected on 6 May 2025 because of the material in the case diary and his nine prior criminal convictions. On 9 January 2026 he again applied for bail, arguing that he had been detained without reason. The court held that there were no fresh grounds to revisit the earlier bail order and therefore denied the bail application, directing the lower court to complete the trial within six months. The petitioner was permitted to file a fresh bail application before the trial court if the trial was not concluded within that period.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the earlier rejection and lack of fresh grounds
- Whether the trial can be directed to be completed within a specified period
- Whether the petitioner may renew his bail application if the trial exceeds six months
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 35
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- criminal antecedent
- IPC
- Arms Act
- trial expeditious
- no fresh ground
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.89420 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-210 Year-2024 Thana- NASRIGANJ District- Rohtas
======================================================
Chhotu Ram Son of Late Shyamsundar Ram @ Late Shyam Sundar Ram R/o
Village - Sahpur, P.S. - Sasaram(M), Distt. - Rohtas.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Nasriganj
P.S. Case No. 210 of 2024 instituted for the offences under
Sections 302, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and 25(1-b)a,
26, 27, 35 of the Arms Act.
3. Earlier vide order dated 06.05.2025, passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 7124 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the material available in the
case diary against the petitioner as also the fact that petitioner
had nine criminal antecedent.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 13.07.2024
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.89420 of 2025(2) dt.09-01-2026
2/2
without any rhymes or reason.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
grant of bail.
6. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition
of the petitioner.
7. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously
preferably within a period of six months from today.
8. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew
his prayer for grant of bail before the court below itself if the
trial is not concluded within the period of six months from
today.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…