Arjun Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55843 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2023 Thana- TARAPUR District- Munger ====================================================== Arjun Kumar S/o Fantush Chaudhari R/o Village- Kumhartola, Tarapur, P.S.- Tarapur, District- Munger ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, Advocate :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Gupta, Advocate :

Ms. Isha Mishra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-09-2025 Heard Mr. Sharda Nand Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pranav Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 13.12.2023, in connection with Tarapur P.S. Case No. 229 of 2023, FIR dated 10.12.2023 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 201 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently added 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the regular bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 18.10.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 59702 of 2024.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55843 of 2025(3) dt.18-09-2025 2/3 submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner is rotting in judicial custody since 13.12.2023 and trial has not concluded as yet.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State, on the other hand, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that there is specific allegation against the petitioner and on the basis of his confessional statement, number of articles have been recovered from the possession of petitioner and apart from that CDR location of the petitioner also suggest that the petitioner was involved in the present crime in question.

6. Vide order dated 11.08.2025, a report was called with regard to stage of the trial. Report of the learned Trial Court dated 20.08.2025 reveals that out of 11 chargesheet witnesses, the prosecution has examined altogether six witnesses.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as the report of the trial Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Tarapur P.S. Case No. 229 of 2023 pending in the Court of District & Additional Sessions Judge, 5th, Munger.

8. Prayer is refused.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55843 of 2025(3) dt.18-09-2025 3/3

9. However the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T