Vishal Kumar Jha @ Bishal Kumar Jha @ Vishal Jha @ Raja @ Vishal v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29098 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2023 Thana- PHENHARA District- East Champaran ====================================================== VISHAL KUMAR JHA @ BISHAL KUMAR JHA @ VISHAL JHA @ RAJA @ VISHAL S/O LATE NAND KISHORE JHA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE -MANIKCHOWK, P.S- RUNNISAIDPUR, DISTRICTSITAMARHI ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Vikash Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-07-2026 Heard Mr. Vikash Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, learned APP for the State.
2.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Phenhara P.S. Case No. 62 of 2023, instituted for the offences under Sections 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
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 by this Court vide order dated 24.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 59054 of 2025 taking into consideration facts and circumstances of the case, nature and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29098 of 2026(3) dt.03-07-2026 2/2 gravity of the offence.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 20.02.2025 without any rhymes or reason and has got seven criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that charge has not yet been framed against the petitioner.
5. As per report dated 19.05.2026, sent by the learned Trial Court, it transpires that a petition under Section 250 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner.
6.
Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 7.
There is no new 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.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T