Subodh Kumar Singh @ Subodh Gop v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22494 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1007 Year-2024 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Subodh Kumar Singh @ Subodh Gop S/o Dwarika Rai @ Dwarika Gop R/o Village - Lakhani Bigha, P.S- Danapur, Dist- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Prabhat, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 1007 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 190, 191(2), 115(2), 117(2), 103, 351(2), 352 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide order dated 19.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 49719 of 2025, taking into account the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner that he pressed a rod on the chest of informant's son, causing suffocation and death.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22494 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026 2/3 4.

In compliance of the order dated 03.04.2026, a report dated 11.05.2026, with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that record is pending for police paper and commitment. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 10.01.2025, without any rhymes or reason, having two criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, hence, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

6.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail. Learned APP has further relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3539 (X. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein in paragraph No.14, Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:

"14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape, murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial commences and the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the Court be it the Trial Court or the High Court should be loath in entertaining the bail application of the accused."

7.

There is no new ground to consider the bail petition

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22494 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026 3/3 of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the trial is going to be started soon.

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 four months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of four months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

9. The learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Patna is hereby directed to assign the case to a competent learned Additional District Judge for conducting the trial at the earliest and to closely monitor the proceedings so as to ensure expeditious framing of charge and prompt examination of witnesses.

10. Let a copy of this order be forthwith communicated to the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Patna for information and necessary compliance.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T