Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18646 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-209 Year-2023 Thana- HALSI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Santosh Yadav @ Santosh Kumar S/O Saryug Yadav R/O Vill.- Dhira, P.S.- Halsi, Dist.- Lakhisarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rabi Bhushan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Halsi P.S. Case No. 209 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 341, 302, 120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier, vide order dated 31.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 73208 of 2024, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the nature of accusation and gravity of offence.

4. In compliance of the order dated 18.03.2026 a report

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18646 of 2026(3) dt.01-05-2026 2/3 dated 18.04.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that 12 witnesses are yet to be examined. It is further appears that trial is expected to be concluded in the next 6-12 months.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been languishing in judicial custody since 19.09.2023 without any justifiable cause. It is further submitted that there has been no progress in the trial owing to the nonappearance of the co-accused, namely, Upendra Kumar. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that the trial of the petitioner be bifurcated from that of the said co-accused.

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

7. Upon consideration of the submissions made and materials available on record, this Court finds that no fresh ground has been made out to consider the bail petition of the petitioner.

8. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner stands rejected.

9. However, in the interest of justice, the learned Trial Court is directed to bifurcate the trial of the petitioner from that of the co-accused, Upendra Kumar, and to proceed with and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18646 of 2026(3) dt.01-05-2026 3/3 conclude the same expeditiously, without granting any undue or unnecessary adjournments.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T