Anuj Kumar @ Ramanuj Prasad Yadav @ Anuj Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63357 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2022 Thana- TANKUPPA District- Gaya ====================================================== Anuj Kumar @ Ramanuj Prasad Yadav @ Anuj Yadav S/o Late Rupan Yadav R/o Village- Thakhi, P.S.- Fatehpur, District- Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 02-09-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Tankuppa P.S. Case No. 06 of 2022, instituted for the offences under Sections 307, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3.

This is the fifth attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected vide orders dated 18.01.2023, 25.08.2023, 26.04.2024 and 27.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 40981 of 2022, Cr. Misc. No. 46672 of 2023, Cr. Misc. No. 23962 of 2024 and Cr. Misc. No. 280 of 2025.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63357 of 2025(2) dt.02-09-2025 2/2 4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 23.03.2022 without any rhymes or reason and has got ten criminal antecedents. It is also submitted that all the 12 charge-sheeted witnesses have been examined but the trial has not yet been concluded.

5.

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 6.

There is no new ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner. As per the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner, it appears that the trial is going on and all the witnesses have been examined in this case. 7.

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 one month from today. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T