2025:JHHC:12359 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 1634 of 2025 --------- Raja Raman Kaushik, aged about 21 years, son of Late Upendra Kumar, resident of village:- Pandeypura, P.O. & P.S.-Hantarganj, Dist:-Chatra, Jharkhand … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. Opp. Party --------- CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA ---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K. Tiwari, S.P.P. ----------- 07/Dated: 25th April, 2025 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Korrah P.S. Case No. 324 of 2023 registered under sections 414, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of Indian Penal Code and section 66(C) and 66(D) of I.T. Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has filed this fresh bail application after rejection of B.A. No.2569 of 2024, which was rejected earlier by this Court on 01.07.2024 with certain observation to renew the prayer of regular bail, if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months. It is further submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and remain physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial and shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidence or influence the witnesses or gain over them. The petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 10.12.2023 without any rhymes and reasons. Hence the petitioner may be enlarged on bail. 4. Learned S. P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. 2025:JHHC:12359 2 5. From perusal of the status report being Letter No.34 dated 18.03.2025 as received from the court concerned, it shows that out of total 13 charge-sheeted witnesses, 7 witnesses have been examined as yet and 6 witnesses have yet to be examined in this case for which a tentative period of 3 months’ time has been sought for by the learned trial court to conclude the trial. 6. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also in the interest of smooth trial of the case as per the status report dated 18.03.2025, I do not feel to entertain this bail application. 7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is rejected. 8. Learned trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the case as per self-imposed time limit, otherwise, petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after three months, if the trial is not concluded. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Pappu/-