Vidyapati Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13524 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2025 Thana- AURAI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Vidyapati Sah S/O Prahlad Sah @ Pralad Sah Village- Mahrauli, P.S.- Aurai, Distt.- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Shashank Shekhar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Anil Kumar Singh No. 1, S.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 440 of 2025, arising out of Aurai P.S. Case No. 05 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Earlier, vide order dated 24.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 22333 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the nature and gravity of the offence and involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the offence with direction to the learned trial Court to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.
4. In compliance of the order dated 25.02.2026, a report dated 13.03.2026 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.13524 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026 2/2 that on 10.09.2025, Charge has been framed against the accused persons. After issuance of summons against the prosecution witnesses, four witnesses including informant have been examined. It is further reported that the case may be disposed of within next two months, if witnesses will be produced regularly on behalf of the prosecution.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 07.01.2025 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 and considering the stage of the trial / case, 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