Virendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4845 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-510 Year-2022 Thana- BHABHUA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Virendra kumar S/o Jay Shri Ram R/o Village- Amadha, P.S.- Sonhan, District- Kaimur at Bhabua ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Tribhuwan Narayan For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Anish Chandra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 02-05-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S. Tr. Case Reg. No. 85 of 2023 arising out of Bhabhua (Sonhan) P.S. Case No. 510 of 2022 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per prosecution case, petitioner and other are said to have killed the informant's daughter for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry and they also disposed of her dead body.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail prayer of the present petitioner has already been rejected by this Court vide Cr. Misc. No. 63005 of 2023 on 05.01.2024 with an observation that if trial is not concluded within nine months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4845 of 2025(3) dt.02-05-2025 2/3 concerned court, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. He further submits that charge has been framed on 24.03.2023 and after framing of charge two years have already been elapsed but up till now trial has not been concluded as yet despite this fact that petitioner is in jail custody since 17.08.2022. He further submits that pace of trial is slow and there is no likelihood of conclusion of trial in near future. Petitioner bears criminal antecedent of two cases in which he is on bail.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that bail of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit. He further submits that trial court has sent its report which reveals that only two witnesses are yet to be examined and trial court has sought two months time to conclude the trial. In the light of aforesaid facts, petitioner does not deserve bail.
6. A report regarding stage of trial has been sought by this court and in pursuance of the said direction, the trial court vide letter no. 19 dated 22.04.2025 has sent its report which reveals that out of seven prosecution witnesses, five prosecution witnesses have been examined and the trial court has sought two months time to conclude the trial.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, bail of petitioner has already been rejected on merit, nature of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4845 of 2025(3) dt.02-05-2025 3/3 allegation levelled against the petitioner, deceased died within two months of her marriage in a suspicion condition as well as material available on record, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
8. However, the trial court is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible. If the trial is not concluded within four months from the date of receipt of this order to the court concerned, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. (Alok Kumar Pandey, J) shahzad/- U T