Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar Yadav @ Guddu Kr. Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5282 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-95 Year-2024 Thana- GOPALPUR District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Guddu Yadav @ Guddu Kumar Yadav @ Guddu Kr. Yadav S/o Dayanand Yadav @ Daya Nand Yadav R/O Village - Tola Sipaya, P.S- Vishambharpur (Bishambharpur), Ditrict- Gopalganj ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Lokesh Kumar Singh, APP For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 302, 376 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 22.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 73036 of 2024 with a liberty to renew the prayer for bail after six months, if the trial is not concluded.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5282 of 2026(4) dt.10-04-2026 2/3 that a report has been called for from the learned Trial Court, and from the perusal of the said report, it appears that all the prosecution evidence has already been recorded and the statement of the accused has also been recorded. At present, the case is pending for defence evidence.
5. It is further submitted that the petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit annexing the depositions of the witnesses. From the perusal of the evidence of the informant, it transpires that he has named the petitioner only on the basis that the marriage of the deceased was fixed with him and that he had given a mobile phone to her. During the course of investigation, the petitioner is stated to have made a confessional statement admitting that he was carrying a knife, had called the deceased to meet him, and had cut her throat with the said knife, which was subsequently recovered on his disclosure. Moreover, the trial is at its fag end.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage which is accordingly rejected.
7. The learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of three months. The petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after three months, if the trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5282 of 2026(4) dt.10-04-2026 3/3 is not concluded within the said period.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) Jagdish/- U T