Patna High CourtCR. MISC./49518/2025dismissed

Shushant Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-10Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49518 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-80 Year-2024 Thana- SIMRI BAKHTIYARPUR DistrictSaharsa ====================================================== Shushant Kumar S/O Om Kumar @ Om Yadav R/o Village-Indrava, PS-Saur Bazar, Distt-Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Randhir Kumar No 1, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Sevak Choudhary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Simri Bakhtiyarpur P.S.Case No. 80 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code and added section 411 of the IPC.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 23.10.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.75381 of 2024, which reads as under:- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Simri Bakhtiyarpur P.S.Case No.80 of 2024 registered for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49518 of 2025(4) dt.10-02-2026 2/2 offence under section 392 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have looted the informant on gun point and assaulted him.

4. The name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of a self inculpatory statement of co-accused and he is in custody since 20.07.2024.

5. The petitioner is also accused in four more cases of similar and serious nature.

6. Considering the nature of allegation and the criminal antecedent of petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

8. The court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same at the earliest."

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charge has been framed.

5. Considering the gravity of the offence and the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and the fact that the trial has started, I am not inclined to review my earlier order.

6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed. (Sandeep Kumar, J) N.K/- U T