Vivek Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29605 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-708 Year-2023 Thana- BHABHUA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Vivek Kumar Son of Sanjay Chaudhary Resident of Bhabhua, Ward No.- 17, Police Station - Bhabhua, District - Kaimur, Bihar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Ms. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 08-07-2025 Heard Mr. Raj Krishna Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State. 2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S. Tr. No. 63 of 2024, arising out of Bhabhua P.S. Case No. 708 of 2023 instituted for the offence under Sections 302, 201 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 25(1-b)a, 26, 27 & 35 of the Arms Act. Vide order dated 28-06-2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 35369 of 2024, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court on merit with a liberty to renew his prayer for bail, if trial is not concluded within a period of nine months. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly submits that petitioner is in custody since 23-11-2023 having no criminal antecedent. It is next submitted that there is no likelihood of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29605 of 2025(3) dt.08-07-2025 2/2 trial being concluded in the near future.

4.

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

5.

A report was called for from the Court below and it is reported that six (6) out of nine (9) witnesses have been examined in this case.

6.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, and specifically taking into account the fact that trial is on the verge of its conclusion as also there being no fresh ground to reconsider the matter, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Prayer for grant of bail is rejected. 7.

The Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within a period of two months.

8.

However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for grant of bail is the trial is not concluded within a period of two months from today.

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