Surendra Prasad @ Surendra Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43936 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-255 Year-2022 Thana- HILSA District- Nalanda ====================================================== Surendra Prasad @ Surendra Yadav S/o Krishna Prasad @ Krishn Prasad Resident of Village-Pakria Bigha, Manpura, P.S.-Hilsa, District-Nalanda. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Virendra Prasad S/o Late Bahadur Prasad Resident of Village- Pakira bigha, P.S -Hilsa,, District- Nalanda ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

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

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No.585 of 2022 arising out of Hilsa P.S. Case No.255 of 2022 lodged on 13.04.2022, for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 379, 338, 302 & 427 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of A.D.J.-I, Hilsa.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the regular bail application of the petitioner has earlier been rejected vide order dated 24.01.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 2213 of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43936 of 2025(3) dt.08-08-2025 2/3 2024 with liberty granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail one year after framing of charge. Counsel submits that one year and six months have been lapsed, but trial has not been concluded till date. Counsel further submits that on earlier occasion, report with regard to the present stage of the trial has been called for.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the examination of Doctor has taken place and trial shall be concluded very soon. Informant is ready to adduce evidences of prosecution whenever there shall be a call from the court/or prosecution to adduce evidence.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that in the earlier rejection order, it has been observed that there is a direct allegation against the petitioner in the FIR of firing due to which, the informant's father died. Counsel further submits that on earlier occasion, report with regard to the present stage of trial has been called for and from perusal of the said report, it transpires that the trial court has stated that trial is likely to be concluded within four months.

6. In this view of the matter, this Court is not inclined

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43936 of 2025(3) dt.08-08-2025 3/3 to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

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