Sheo Balak Sharma v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39670 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2022 Thana- SIDHWALIYA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== Sheo Balak Sharma Son of Late Narsing Sharma Resident of Mauza- Supoli, P.S.- Sidhawaliya, District- Gopalganj.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 10-09-2025 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Mr. Binod Kumar, Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 13.07.2023 in connection with Sidhwaliya P.S. Case No. 187 of 2022, F.I.R. dated 05.06.2022 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302, 120(B), 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 06.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 63750 of 2024.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39670 of 2025(3) dt.10-09-2025 2/2 allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offences as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 13.7.2023 and the trial has not been concluded as yet.

5. Vide order dated 02.07.2025 a report was called with regard to the present stage of trial. Report of the learned Trial Court dated 25.07.2025 reveals that out of 17 charge sheet witnesses, 13 witnesses have already been examined the case is pending for the examination of remaining 4 witnesses.

6. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

7. Considering the report of the learned Trial Court as well as nature of allegation as alleged in the F.I.R, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Sidhwaliya P.S. Case No. 187 of 2022 pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Gopalganj.

8. Prayer is refused.

9. However, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial at the earliest.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T