Patna High CourtCR. MISC./19180/2026dismissed

Munna Prasad @ Munna Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-03Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19180 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-128 Year-2024 Thana- Geedha District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Munna Prasad @ Munna Kumar S/O Khaderan Prasad @ Vijay Prasad R/O Village- Birampur, P.S.- Giddha, District- Bhojpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bhawana Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Sumiran Rai ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail in connection with Giddha P.S. Case No. 128 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 319(2), 318(4), & 316(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 02.07.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 7061 of 2025 which reads as follows:- Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Gidha P.S. Case No. 128 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 319(2), 318(4), 316(4) of the B.N.S. 3. As per

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19180 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026 2/3 the prosecution case, the petitioner and one Chandan Sahay are said to have cheated the depositors while they were given CSP center of Bihar Gramin Bank.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. He submits that the petitioner was peon in the Bank. The petitioner is in custody since 11.10.2024.

5. Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and produced letter dated 29.05.2025, which shows that the petitioner is one of the owners of the C.S.P. center.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application for regular bail is hereby rejected.

8. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial. 9. Letter dated 29.05.2025 is taken on record.

4. This Court finds no ground to review its earlier order. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands rejected.

5. It is made clear that any observation made herein is prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19180 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026 3/3 and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any manner.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) Shishir/- U T