Patna High Court
Arnav Shaurya @ RaviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
Holding
The court declined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Arnav Shaurya, was arrested in connection with a murder case (PS Case No. 77 2020) involving offences under Sections 302, 324, 120(B), 34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The prosecution alleged that the petitioner, along with another accused, shot the informant’s son over a land dispute, and recovered a pistol and live cartridges from the petitioner. The petitioner sought regular bail for the second time, arguing that most prosecution witnesses had already been examined. The court, noting the seriousness of the charges, the material evidence, and that the trial was nearing its conclusion, refused to grant bail. It directed the trial court to expedite the trial in line with a recent Supreme Court judgment. Consequently, the bail application was disposed of without relief.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail given the seriousness of the offences, the existence of incriminating material, and the proximity of trial conclusion?
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 302, 324, 34
Subjects
- regular bail
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- trial acceleration
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90325 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2020 Thana- LAHERIMUHALLA District- Nalanda
======================================================
Arnav Shaurya @ Ravi Son of Ashok Vishawkarma @ Ashok Vishawkarma
R/o - Line Par Mirzapur, Nawada, Near Surya Mandir, P.S - Nawada, District
- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Prem Kumar Jha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
2 26-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner to
obtain regular bail in connection with Laheri P.S. Case No. 77 of
2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302,
324, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the
Arms Act. He is in custody since 18.06.2020 having one
criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph ‘3’ of the application.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that his younger son was studying in Biharsharif and was living
in the house of one Bhanu Kumar. The informant further alleged
that he got information on his mobile that his son has been shot
at by accused persons and has been taken to Sadar Hospital,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90325 of 2025(2) dt.26-02-2026
2/3
Biharsharif. He reached hospital and found the dead body of his
son. Police collected mobile location and after obtaining call
details of the deceased, the name of the petitioner namely, Arnav
Shaurya and one other accused was revealed. The informant has
further alleged that the cause of occurrence is dispute relating to
land and son of the informant was being threatened by the FIR
named accused persons.
4. Earlier, vide order dated 01.11.2021 in Cr. Misc.
No. 19439 of 2021, this Court had rejected the prayer for bail of
the petitioner after looking into the materials present in the case
diary and the CDR analysis of the mobile phone of the
petitioner and the deceased as also the fact that from the
possession of the petitioner, a pistol and 17 live cartridges have
been recovered by police.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that out
of 15 prosecution witnesses, 13 have already been examined.
6. Learned APP for the State submits that since the
trial itself is at the fag end of the conclusion, considering the
seriousness of the allegations and the materials present on the
record, the petitioner does not deserve privilege of bail.
7. Having regard to the entire facts and circumstances
of the case, considering the kind of materials on the record and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90325 of 2025(2) dt.26-02-2026
3/3
that the trial itself is likely to be concluded very soon, this Court
is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. The trial court is directed to proceed with the trial
keeping in view the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court in the case of The Central Bureau of Investigation Vs.
Mir Usman @ Ara @ Mir Usman Ali passed in Special Leave
to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 969 of 2025 and conclude the trial as
early as possible.
9. This application stands disposed of accordingly.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J)
rishik/-
U T
Checking your session…