Patna High CourtCR. MISC./11839/2026bail rejected

Deepak Kumar Jha @ Deepak Kumar @ Dipak Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-13Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11839 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-130 Year-2024 Thana- AMAUR District- Purnia ====================================================== Deepak Kumar Jha @ Deepak Kumar @ Dipak Kumar S/o- Sri Lalan Kumar Jha @ Lalit Jha Resident of Dodara Madhubani P.S- Lalitgram, Supaul ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amit Kumar Anand, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, A.P.P.

====================================================== 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 Sadar Amour P.S. Case No. 130 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 364(A) and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier, on two occasions, vide order dated 12.11.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 51623 of 2024 and vice order dated 14.11.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 68345 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the material available on record with a liberty to renew the prayer after nine months and two months, respectively, if the trial is not concluded.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.03.2024

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11839 of 2026(2) dt.13-02-2026 2/2 without any rhymes or reason.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail. He further submitted that all prosecution witnesses as well as defence witness have been examined in this case. The trial in on the verge of conclusion.

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 two months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of two 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