Pankaj Kumar Yadav @ Pankaj Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48131 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2022 Thana- SIMULTALLA District- Jamui ====================================================== Pankaj Kumar Yadav @ Pankaj Yadav S/o Bhushan Yadav R/o VillBastiyadih, P.S. and P.O. - Simultala, Dist- Jamui ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Tilak Sao, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-07-2025 Heard Mr. Tilak Sao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ramesh Chandra, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 27.08.2022 in connection with S.T. No. 97 of 2023 arising out of Simultala P.S. Case No. 75 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 10.08.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 120B, 34 of the IPC and 27 of the Arms Act.
3. According to prosecution case, the brother of the informant is alleged to have been shot dead after inflicting gun shot injury made by the accused persons including the petitioner.
4. Earlier, the petitioner has moved before this Court for grant of regular bail in Cr. Misc. No. 7779 of 2023 but the same was rejected by this Court vide order dated 15.09.2023. Thereafter, the petitioner has again moved before this Court in Cr. Misc. No. 29878 of 2024, but the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.48131 of 2025(3) dt.25-07-2025 2/2 order dated 26.04.2024.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the trial has not been concluded yet and petitioner is in custody since 27.08.2022.
6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits earlier, the bail petition of the petitioner was rejected on merit and apart from that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner in the FIR. It also appears from the impugned order itself that the case is fixed for argument and it is in its final stage.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and the finding of the learned Trial Court in the impugned order, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with S.T. No. 97 of 2023 arising out of Simultala P.S. Case No. 75 of 2022, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Jamui.
8. Prayer is refused.
9. However, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial at the earliest.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) priyanka/- U T