IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 1028 of 2023 ----- Samual Kandulna @ Samu Chacha @ Samual Chacha, S/o Birsa Kandulna, R/o Village-Kedke, P.O & P.S.-Bandgaon, Dist.-West Singhbhum … …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … …. Opp. Party ----- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishal Kumar Rai, Advocate For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Mishra, A.P.P. ----- Oral Order 06 / Dated : 10.01.2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner named above has been made accused in connection with Torpa P.S. Case No. 17 of 2021 (G.R. No. 370 of 2021, S.T. No. 116 of 2021) for the offence under Sections 25(1-B) a, 25(6), 26, 35 of the Arms Act and Section 17 of CLA Act, pending in the court of Dist. & Addl. Session Judge-II, Khunti. Earlier the bail of this petitioner was allowed by this Court vide order dated 01.03.2023 against which the State preferred Special Leave Petition (Cr.) No. 4304 of 2024 before Hon’ble the Supreme Court. Pursuant to that, the order granting bail was set aside and the matter was remanded back to this Court to be considered afresh and decided after considering the material that may be placed before this Court by the respective sides. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody in this case since 16.03.2021 and three years and ten months have elapsed in custody. The petitioner is in custody under different provisions of the Arms Act in which the maximum sentence is ten years. The maximum sentence under Section 17 of C.L.A. Act is six months. Out of eleven cases, which is pending against the petitioner, he is on bail in most of the cases. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioner is a Zonal Commander of PLFI, which is a banned extremist organization. The petitioner has criminal antecedents and is involved in several cases. Having considered the submission advanced on behalf of both sides and on perusal of the stage of trial, received from the Trial Court, it appears that the petitioner has criminal antecedents and is wanted in almost dozen of cases. In the present case, two cartridges and one country-made pistol were seized from the possession of the petitioner. Further, the trial is at its penultimate stage, as out of ten witnesses, five have been examined so far. Considering the gravity of offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is hereby rejected. However, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial. (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.) AKT/Satendra