Vishal Patel @ Vishal Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.68459 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-263 Year-2023 Thana- MAHARAJGANJ District- Siwan ====================================================== Vishal Patel @ Vishal Kumar S/O Raju Patel @ Raju Rawat Resident of Vill.- Paterhi, P.S.-Maharajganj, Dist.- Siwan ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms. Kumari Anupam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 19-09-2025 Heard Ms. Kumari Anupam, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Maharajganj P.S. Case No. 263 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302, 504, 506, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier vide order dated 28.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 13419 of 2025 the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner was rejected by this Court taking into account the direct allegation against the petitioner of inflicting knife blow on the backbone of the informant's grandson.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that earlier, vide order dated 28.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 13419 of 2025 the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner was rejected by this Court. This is the second attempt of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.68459 of 2025(2) dt.19-09-2025 2/2 petitioner for grant of bail. He mainly submitted that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 23.09.2024 and there is no significant progress in the trial and even after a lapse of one year, charges against the petitioner have not been framed. Learned counsel, therefore, prays that petitioner may be released on bail. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

6. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties, this Court finds no fresh ground to reconsider the matter which has already been decided on merit by this Court, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.

8. Learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.

9. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew the prayer for grant of bail before the Trial Court if the trial is not concluded within a period of six months from today. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T