Patna High CourtCR. MISC./35995/2026dismissed

Sanjay Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

2026-06-30Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 35995 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-543 Year-2024 Thana- PIRPAINTI District- Bhagalpur ====================================================== Sanjay Paswan Son of Ambika Paswan Resident of Mohalla- Choti Dilori, P.S.- Pirpainti, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. S. M. Ashraf, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Rana Hason, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 30-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail in connection with S.T. No. 300 of 2025 arising out of Pirpainti P.S. Case No. 543 of 2024, registered for the offence under Sections 103(1) & 238 of the B.N.S., 2023.

3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on 15.10.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 50990 of 2025 which reads as follows:- "Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Pirpainti P.S. Case No. 543 of 2024 / S.T. Case No. 300 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections 103(1)/238 of the BNS.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and others have called the deceased

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 35995 of 2026(2) dt.30-06-2026 2/2 and have killed him after forcibly taking Rs. 1 lakh from him.

4. The petitioner is in custody since 09.12.2024.

5. Considering the serious allegations levelled against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this application stands dismissed."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the trial, three out of ten witnesses have been examined

5. Considering the gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to review my earlier order.

6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again. (Sandeep Kumar, J) sadique/- U T