Anshu Aman Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10637 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2024 Thana- NAUBATPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Anshu Aman Singh S/o- Sri Gauram Singh R/v- Nenaur Ps- Sahar DistBhojpur at Ara ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Umanath Mishra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 13-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 141 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 302, 120(B) & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 28.04.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27271 of 2025, taking into account the nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence as also there being specific allegation against the petitioner of firing.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10637 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026 2/2 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 10.09.2024, without any rhymes or reason, having no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, hence, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

6.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail. It is mainly submitted that the present one is the case of double murder, hence, petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.

7.

There is no new ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner, which is already decided by this Court on merit.

8.

In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of six months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

Raj Kishore/- (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) U T