Monu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72458 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-165 Year-2023 Thana- RAHUI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Monu Kumar S/o- Satish Charndra Verma @ Satish Prasad Resident Of Village- Jagdishpur, Ps- Nalanda, Dist- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Mithlesh Kumar Khare, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 01-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.T. No. 230 of 2024, arising out of Rahui P.S. Case No. 165 of 2023 instituted for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 307, 302 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3.

This is the third attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide orders dated 19.04.2024 & 14.02.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 15878 of 2024 & Cr. Misc. No. 83933 of 2024.

4.

In compliance of the order dated 10.10.2025, a report dated 13.11.2025, with regard to the present stage of trial

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72458 of 2025(3) dt.01-12-2025 2/3 has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that four out of six charge sheet witnesses have been examined in this case.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 01.11.2023, without any rhymes or reason, having no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel further submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future. Learned counsel goes on to submit that the continued incarceration of the petitioner without conclusion of trial amounts to a gross violation of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which is reiterated by Hon'ble Apex Court in plethora of judgments.

6.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail.

7.

There is no new ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner which is already decided by this Court on merit. 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72458 of 2025(3) dt.01-12-2025 3/3 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, Nalanda and the Superintendent of Police, Nalanda are also directed to 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, Nalanda and the Superintendent of Police, Nalanda. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T