Patna High CourtCR. MISC./5929/2026bail rejected

Md. Jasim v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-18Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5929 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-281 Year-2024 Thana- BELDOUR District- Khagaria ====================================================== Md. Jasim S/o Md. Hussain R/o vill - Jafarbasa, P.S.- Beldaur, Distt.- Khagaria, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Seema Kumari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Md. Mushtaque Alam, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 18-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.T. No. 702 of 2025, arising out of Beldaur P.S. Case No. 281 of 2024 (G.R. No. 2424 of 2024) instituted for the offences under Sections 103(1) 309(6) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Earlier vide order dated 08.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 1308 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence, with a direction to the trial Court to expedite the trial expeditiously.

4. In compliance of the order dated 29.01.2026, a report dated 07.02.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5929 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026 2/2 that on 10.12.2025 charge has been framed against the accused persons and summon has been issued against the prosecution witnesses.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 05.08.2024 without any rhymes or reason.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

7. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner.

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 five months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of five months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) manish/- U T