Patna High CourtCR. MISC./18330/2025rejected

Pramod Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2025-05-09Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18330 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-135 Year-2018 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Pramod Sah S/O Khakhan Sah R/o - Mohanpur, P.S - Mahua, District Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 09-05-2025 Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Kumar Veerendra Narayan, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 08.02.2021, in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 135 of 2018 corresponding to Trial No. 362 of 2021, F.I.R. dated 10.06.2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 304(B), 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 10.04.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 66605 of 2022. Thereafter, the petitioner had again moved before this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 17428 of 2024 which was also rejected vide order dated 26.04.2024.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18330 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025 2/3

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 08.02.2021 and the trial is not concluded as yet.

5. Vide order dated 26.03.2025 a report was called for with regard to the stage of the trial. Report dated 26.04.2025 of the learned Trial Court reveals that charge has been framed against the petitioner on 07.02.2024 and out of seven chargesheeted witnesses, four witnesses have been examined including the informant and Investigating Officer.

6. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that in view of the nature of allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. and supported by the medical evidence, the petitioner is not entitled for bail.

7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case as well as in view of the report of the learned Trial Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 135 of 2018 corresponding to Trial No. 362 of 2021 pending in the Court of learned District & Additional Sessins Judge-VII, Vaishali at Hajipur.

8. Prayer is refused.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18330 of 2025(3) dt.09-05-2025 3/3

9. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T