Patna High CourtCR. MISC./10211/2026bail rejected

Chunnu Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-10Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10211 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-649 Year-2021 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Chunnu Sharma Son of Ravindra Sharma R/o Vill. - Devariya, Ward No. 29, South of Pani Tanki, P.S. - Jehanabad, Dist. - Jehanabad. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-03-2026 Heard Mr. Chandni Kumari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 649 of 2021 instituted for the offences under Sections 302, 328, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier vide order dated 05.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 20657 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the specific and heinous nature of offence against the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 25.06.2024 without any rhymes or reason. He further submitted that there

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10211 of 2026(2) dt.10-03-2026 2/2 are five charge-sheeted witnesses and out of them, four witnesses have been examined and only one, i.e. the examination of the informant is pending. He further submitted that no independent witness has supported the case of prosecution till date.

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

6. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner as also since the trial is on the verge of conclusion, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. 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) Alok Verma/- U T