Hiralal Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66553 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2024 Thana- SIRISIYA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Hiralal Yadav S/o- Langatu Yadav Resident of Vill- Musahari, P.S.- Sirisiya, Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 31-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sirisiya P.S. Case No. 35 of 2024, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 27.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 86583 of 2024 considering the ample material against the petitioner followed by his selfconfession. 4.

In compliance of the order dated 12.09.2025, a report dated 24.09.2025 with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66553 of 2025(3) dt.31-10-2025 2/3 appears that out of five charge-sheeted witnesses, four witnesses have already been examined in this case. It is further reported that the Doctor and I.O. are yet to be examined and the trial is likely to be concluded within nine months.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 22.05.2024 without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal antecedent.

6.

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 7.

There is no new ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the trial is going on and is at an advance stage. 8.

In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of two months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

9. The District Magistrate, West Champaran and the Superintendent of Police, West Champaran are also directed to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66553 of 2025(3) dt.31-10-2025 3/3 take necessary steps to produce the witnesses on the date fixed in the Trial Court so that the trial could be concluded within the stipulated period.

10. Let this order be communicated to the District Magistrate, West Champaran and the Superintendent of Police, West Champaran.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T