Sujit Kumar @ Sujeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48245 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-145 Year-2023 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai ====================================================== Sujit Kumar @ Sujeet Kumar S/o Nawal Yadav @ Naval Yadav R/o vill - Herudiyara, P.S.- Kasim Bazar, Distt.- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
The Branch Manager, Branch Garhi Bishanpur, South Bihar Gramin Bank Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Mirityunjay Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Jagdhar Prasad, APP For the O.P. No. 2 :
Mr. Suresh Pd. Singh No.1, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Raj, Adv.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 12-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the South Bihar Gramin Bank.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 23 of 2024 arising out of Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 145 of 2023, dated 27.02.2023, lodged under Sections 392, 395, 412 & 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 25(1-B)(A) & 26 of the Arms Act, pending before the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge-III, Lakhisarai.
2/4
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected vide order dated 02.12.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 47536 of 2024 with liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months from the date of the rejection order.
4. Counsel further submits that the petitioner has been in custody since 24.04.2023. The offence lodged in the present case is Magisterial triable in nature, and the trial has not been concluded till date. He further submits that on the previous occasion, a report regarding the present stage of the trial was called for.
5. Learned counsel for the South Bihar Gramin Bank vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner has been identified in the CCTV footage. He further submits that, according to his information, more than half of the witnesses have been examined and the trial is likely to be concluded within a short span of time. He also submits that the bail application of the co-accused, Kundan Kumar, has been rejected by this Court vide order dated 08.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43228 of 2025.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that, on the previous occasion,
3/4 a report regarding the present stage of the trial was called for. He further submits that it transpires from the said report that out of 7 witnesses, 4 witnesses have been examined and part examination of one witness has also taken place. He further submits that the Trial Court has stated that the trial may be concluded within six months.
7. It transpires to this Court that the present matter pertains to Lakhisarai District.
8. Speedy trial is a constitutional vision of justice. For this reason, the Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai is directed to do the needful so that the SHO/IO concerned shall produce the charge-sheet witnesses before the Trial Court in connection with Sessions Trial No. 23 of 2024 arising out of Lakhisarai P.S. Case No. 145 of 2023 within three months from the date of production of this order.
9. The Registry is directed to transmit a copy of this order to the Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai through fax, email or any other mode forthwith. The Registry is further directed to handover a copy of this order to learned A.P.P. who shall communicate this order to the Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai at his level.
10. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to
4/4 grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T