Patna High CourtCR. MISC./15075/2026bail rejected

Jhapta Singh @ Jhaptu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2026-03-18Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15075 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-166 Year-2024 Thana- ALAMNAGAR District- Madhepura ====================================================== Jhapta Singh @ Jhaptu Singh Son of Late Ramotar Singh Resident of VillageKhapur, P.S.- Alamnagar, District- Madhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Brajesh Kumar Singh Alias Brajesh Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Renu Kumari, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 18-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Alamnagar (Ratwara O.P) P.S. Case No. 166 of 2024 (S.T. No. 276 of 2025) instituted for the offences under Sections 302 and 102(B)of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier vide order dated 10.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 74199 of 2024, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the nature and gravity of the case.

4. In compliance of the order dated 25.02.2026, a report dated 09.03.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that the case is fixed for prosecution evidence. Out of ten

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15075 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026 2/2 witnesses, three witnesses have been examined. It is further reported that the trial of this case is likely to be concluded within a period of nine months.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 12.05.2024 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, 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 six months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of six 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