[2025:JHHC:24536] -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1557 of 2025 Kameshwar Ram, aged about 61 years, son of Raghubir Ram, resident of village Salempur, P.O. Haider Nagar, P.S. Haider Nagar, District Palamau, at present residing at village Adhaur, Near Ashram Road, Sudna, P.O. Sudna, P.S. Town Thana, Town Daltonganj, District Palamau. ..... … Petitioner Versus Central Bureau of Investigation ..... … Opposite Party -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate. : Mr. Rishav Kumar, Advocate. For the CBI : Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate. ----- 07/ 20.08.2025 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel for the CBI. 2. The petitioner is seeking regular bail, in connection with R.C. Case No. 01(A)/2024-R, registered for the offence under Sections 120-B read with 409, 420, 467, 468, 469 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate-cum-Special Judicial Magistrate, CBI, Ranchi. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner moved before this Court in Α.Β.Α. Νο. 6994 of 2019 which was allowed vide order dated 21.10.2019 passed by the co- ordinate bench, however, the condition of the said anticipatory bail was not fulfilled and thereafter the petitioner has been arrested. He submits that thereafter the petitioner has also filed Cr.M.P. No. 4065 of 2019 in connection with Ramna P.S. Case No. 145 of 2019 which was dismissed by order dated 18.09.2020 by the co-ordinate bench and thereafter, the petitioner had moved before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No. 23551 of 2020 in connection with Ramna P.S. Case No. 145 of 2019 which was dismissed by order dated 25.11.2020. He further submits that the [2025:JHHC:24536] -2- petitioner has moved before this Court in Cr.M.P. No. 888 of 2021 in connection Ramna P.S. Case No. 145 of 2019 which was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 27.08.2021 thereafter, the petitioner has also filed B.A. No. 15078 of 2021 before this Hon'ble Court in connection with Ramna P.S. Case No. 145 of 2019 which has been dismissed vide order dated 11.04.2022 and then the petitioner has filed B.A. No. 4722 of 2023, which has also been rejected by the order dated 14.06.2024 and against that order, the petitioner has moved before the Hon’ble Supreme court in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 10678 of 2024, which was dismissed by order dated 14.08.2024, however, liberty was given to the petitioner to move before the learned trial court for bail in the changed circumstance and if the trial prolongs, due to reasons not attributable to the petitioner. He submits that this bail petition is not filed on merit and only on the ground of delay in trial and further due to delay in paper supply by the CBI, the charge has not been framed against the petitioner. On this ground, he submits that regular bail may kindly be granted to the petitioner. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the CBI has opposed the prayer and submits that supplementary affidavit has been filed by the CBI, in which, entire ordersheets have been annexed and further submits that against four of the accused persons, the charges have already been framed on the same police paper supplied by the CBI and the petitioner is not allowing to frame the charge against him on one pretext or another. He submits that even the discharge petition has been filed by the petitioner before the learned court on 07.05.2025, which clearly suggests that the petitioner is having the full police paper, in view of that he has filed the discharge petition. 5. In view of the above facts, it transpires that in light of the observation made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the petition has been filed for regular bail on the ground that the trial is being delayed. However, from the facts, it transpires that the trial is being delayed due to act of the petitioner and four of the accused persons have allowed the charge to be framed on the same police paper, wherein the petitioner is [2025:JHHC:24536] -3- trying to make out a case that the entire police paper has not been supplied, however, police paper appears to be supplied and it further strengthened in view of the fact that the petitioner has filed the discharge petition, which clearly suggests that the police paper has already been received by the petitioner, in view of that the discharge petition has been filed by the petitioner. 6. In view of the above, it transpires that the delay has occurred in the trial due to the action of the petitioner, as such, he is acting against the observation of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 10678 of 2024. As such, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. As such, this petition is dismissed. (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Amitesh/-