Patna High CourtCR. MISC./32388/2025dismissed

Anek Yadav @ Anek Kumar Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-18Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32388 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2023 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Darbhanga ====================================================== ANEK YADAV @ ANEK KUMAR YADAV S/O Rambinesh Yadav @ Hakru yadav @ Ram Dinesh Yadav @ Ram Vinesh Yadav R/O Village- Taralahi, PSBahadurpur, Dist- Darbhanga ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Rina Sinha, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Krishna Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-07-2025 Heard learned counsels for the parties.

2. This application for grant of regular bail arises out of Bahadurpur P.S. Case No.216 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under sections 302 and 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court on 21.06.2024 in Cr. Misc. No.30061 of 2024 by the following order:- Heard learned counsels for the parties.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32388 of 2025(3) dt.18-07-2025 2/3

3. The petitioner and others are accused of committing murder of a person. The petitioner has criminal antecedents also.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no overt act against the petitioner and he is not named in the F.I.R.

and therefore, he deserves bail.

5. During investigation, it has come that the petitionerhas actively participated in the crime. The petitioner has blocked the road so that the victim could not escape and thereafter, all the accused persons have killed him.

6. Considering the fact that the petitioner has actively participated in the killing of the deceased because of the earlier dispute, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected. If there is no substantial progress in the trial, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

7. The observations made hereinabove are only for the purpose of deciding the present bail application and the same shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the matter before the trial court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 05.01.2024 and as the trial is delayed he may be granted bail.

5. Learned Senior Counsel for the informant submits that trail has started and one witness has already been examined.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32388 of 2025(3) dt.18-07-2025 3/3 He further submits that the prosecution will produce the witnesses in the trail on the dates fixed and will not delay the trial.

6. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to review the earlier order. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

7. However, petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail if the trial is delayed.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) shikha/- U T