Patna High CourtCR. MISC./40829/2026bail rejected

Yadunath Singh @ Bhulla v. The State Of Bihar

2026-06-19Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.40829 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-127 Year-2024 Thana- KHAJAULI District- Madhubani ====================================================== Yadunath Singh @ Bhulla Son of Late Hiralal Singh Resident of Village -Kanhauli (Turkaha), P.S.- Khajauli, District -Madhubani ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vikas Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Akbar Ali, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 19-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.T. No. 121 of 2025, arising out of Khajauli P.S. Case No. 127 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 302 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-B)a, 26 and 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier, vide order dated 08.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27983 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering that there being direct allegation of firing against the petitioner, which fact is duly corroborated by the postmortem report. The trial Court was directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.40829 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 20.06.2024 without any rhymes or reason. He further submits that out of 8 prosecution witnesses only two witnesses have been examined.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

6. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner.

7. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of four months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of four months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) manish/- U T