Sanjeev Kumar @ Sanju v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53011 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2022 Thana- DULHIN BAZAR District- Patna ====================================================== Sanjeev Kumar @ Sanju, Male, aged about 30 years, Son of Mahendra Singh, Resident of Sabazpura, P.S.- Dulhin Bazaar, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Madhumay Madhup, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESH CHAND MALVIYA ORAL ORDER 12-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Dulhin Bazar P.S. Case No. 09 of 2022 instituted for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 307, 302, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Allegation against the petitioner along with other co-accused persons is that they opened fired upon the chest of the informant's husband, due to which, he shot dead on the spot.

4. Earlier the prayer for bail of this petitioner was twice rejected by a Co-ordinate Benches of this Court passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 27293 of 2023 and 28086 of 2024 vide orders dated 22.08.2023 and 21.06.2024 as also a petition of this petitioner was withdraw and disposed of vide order dated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53011 of 2025(3) dt.12-09-2025 2/2 01.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 24112 of 2025 by this Court. In Cr. Misc. No. 27293 of 2023, there is a direction to the learned Trial Court to expedite the Trial and conclude the same as soon as possible and in Cr. Misc. No. 28086 of 2024, there is also a direction to the learned trial Court to conclude the same within six months, failing which the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

5. Accordingly, there is no any fresh ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner, hence the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby again rejected.

6. The learned trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of four months from today, failing which the petitioner shall be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the trial Court.

(Ramesh Chand Malviya, J) Anand Kr.

U T