Md. Kaisher v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36788 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-394 Year-2020 Thana- MAKHDUMPUR District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Md. Kaisher S/O of Md. Jamal Resident of Village- Harnitar, PSMakhdumpur, Dist- Jehanabad ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Monina Khatoon W/O Late Md. Husain R/O Village-Japharganj,PSJehanabad, Distt-Jehanabad(Bihar) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Pronoti Singh, A.P.P ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 08-08-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No.95 of 2021 arising out of Makhdumpur P.S. Case No.394 of 2020 lodged on 04.10.2020, for the offence punishable under Sections 304(B), 201 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code read, pending in the Court of Additional Sessions JudgeIII, Jehanabad.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the regular bail application of the petitioner has earlier been rejected vide order dated 03.05.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18415 of 2024 with liberty granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36788 of 2025(3) dt.08-08-2025 2/2 for bail nine months after framing of charge.

4. Learned APP for the State raised a preliminary objection and submits that as per paragraph nos.16 and 17 of the present bail application, it has been stated that the petitioner is in custody since 30.08.2022 and charge has already been framed on 27.02.2021. It transpires that the said statements are erroneous.

5. Upon a specific query of the Court from the counsel for the petitioner regarding the said statements, counsel is not in a position to explain how this situation occurred.

6. As such, this Court is of the view that the present bail application is defective, and accordingly, the same is hereby dismissed.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Divyansh/- U T