Vivek Kumar Jaiswal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51680 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-195 Year-2024 Thana- BARGAINIA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Vivek Kumar Jaiswal S/o Prem Chandra Talwar @ Premchandra Sah Kalwar R/o Village- Karunia, P.S.- Shivnagar (Devahi gonahi), Dist.- Rautahat, (Nepal) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Supriya Rani, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 25-07-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bairgania P.S. Case No. 195 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Section 143 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Earlier vide order dated 21-11-2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 71330 of 2024 regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court. 3.

Allegation against the petitioner is of being indulge in human trafficking. Four minor children who were being taken to Delhi for child labour by this petitioner have been recovered. 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 08.08.2024 and has no criminal antecedent. Charge in this case has not been framed. There is no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51680 of 2025(2) dt.25-07-2025 2/2 likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future. 5.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned counsel further submitted that during course of investigation several witnesses have supported the case of prosecution. 6.

Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also taking into account the nature and gravity of offence and specifically taking into account the fact that there is no fresh ground to reconsider the matter, which is already decided by this Court on merit, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7.

Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is once again rejected.

8.

The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and unnecessary adjournments.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T