Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Ravi Kumar @ Ravi DasversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL REJECTED

Holding

The bail petition is dismissed as there are no fresh grounds and the trial is at an advanced stage.

Summary

The petitioner, Ravi Kumar, was arrested in connection with offences under IPC sections 363, 366(A), 504, 506/34 and section 8 of the POCSO Act. An earlier bail application was rejected, with a liberty to renew after six months. The petitioner again sought bail, claiming he had been in judicial custody since 25‑08‑2024. The court noted that the trial was at an advanced stage, with seven of eight charge‑sheet witnesses already examined and the trial expected to conclude within a month. Since no fresh ground for bail was shown, the court rejected the bail petition, directing the trial court to expedite the trial within a month and allowing the petitioner to renew the bail prayer if the trial is not concluded. The court also directed the Civil Surgeon to ensure the medical officer’s appearance before the trial court.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail can be granted at the present advanced stage of trial.
  • Whether any fresh ground exists to justify granting bail despite the earlier rejection.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • criminal procedure
  • IPC
  • POCSO
  • judicial custody
  • trial stage

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90313 of 2025
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2024 Thana- Bhelahi District- East Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Ravi Kumar @ Ravi Das S/o Laxmi Das R/o Bhelahi, P.S.- Bhelahi, Dist-
                 East Champaran
                                                                     ... ... Petitioner/s
                                              Versus

           1.    The State of Bihar
           2.    X S/o Y R/o vill - Bhelahi, P.s.- Bhelahi, Distt.- East Champaran

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Dhannjay Kumar II, Advocate
                 for the O.P. no.2        :        Mr. Vijay Shankar Shrivastav, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Binod Kumar, A.P.P.
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   11-03-2026               Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel

                   for the O.P. No.2 and learned APP for the State.

                             2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bhelahi

                   P.S. Case No. 16 of 2024, instituted for the offences under

                   Sections 363, 366(A), 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code

                   and u/s 8 of the POCSO Act.

                             3. Earlier vide order dated 22.03.2025 passed in Cr.

                   Misc. No. 88634 of 2024, regular bail of the petitioner was

                   rejected by this Court considering the statement of the victim,

                   with a liberty to renew the prayer after six months if the trial is

                   not concluded.

                             4. In compliance of the order dated 17.01.2026, a report
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90313 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026
                                            2/3




          dated 11.02.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial has

          been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears

          that out of eight chargesheet witnesses, seven witnesses have

          been examined in this case and only medical officer is to be

          examined. It is further reported that the trial would be

          completed within a month.

                   5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 25.08.2024

          without any rhymes or reason.

                   6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          grant of bail.

                   7. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition

          of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, 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

          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 one month from today. If the trial

          is not concluded within the period of one month, as stated

          above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before

          the court below.

                       9. The Civil Surgeon, Motihari, East Champaran, is
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90313 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026
                                                       3/3




                     hereby directed to take all sincere steps to produce the Medical

                     Officer of this case before the trial Court.

                                  10. Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Civil

                     Surgeon, Motihari, East Champaran.



                                           (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

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

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

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