Bhuar Mian @ Bhuar Khan @ Arif Khan @ Aarif Khan @ Bhuwar Mia @ Bhuwar Khan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22660 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-34 Year-2021 Thana- ARA RAIL P.S. District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Bhuar Mian @ Bhuar Khan @ Arif Khan @ Aarif Khan @ Bhuwar Mia @ Bhuwar Khan Son of Md. Munna Khan @ Muna Kha @ Munna Khan Resident of Village- Bagahi (Baghi), P.S.- Bihiya, District- Bhojpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Diwakar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-05-2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 393 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had earlier moved this Court seeking regular bail by filing Criminal Miscellaneous No. 70124 of 2021 and the same came to be allowed by an order dated 27.04.2022, with a direction to the learned Trial Court that if the learned Trial Court comes to a conclusion that petitioner is trying to delay the trial, in that event, the learned Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22660 of 2026(2) dt.12-05-2026 2/2 earlier petitioner was taken in custody on 10.06.2021 and thereafter was granted the privilege of regular bail by order dated 27.04.2022, thereafter, petitioner was pursuing the trial, but on 27.01.2025, the petitioner left the trial and on 01.07.2025, his bail bonds came to be cancelled, thereafter the petitioner surrendered on 07.01.2026.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the regular bail application of the petitioner and submits that from perusal of the order impugned, it would manifest that multiple witnesses have been examined and on account of conduct of the petitioner, the trial got delayed and his case was also separated. It is next submitted that if privilege of regular bail is granted, the petitioner may abscond again.
6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail.
7. Accordingly, the instant regular bail application stands rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishabh/- U T