Mishrilal Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73726 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-62 Year-2023 Thana- PIYAR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Mishrilal Chaudhary S/O Late Jhapas Chaudhary R/O Village- Bandra, P.SPiyar, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Usha Devi W/o Ranjeet Chaudhary R/o Village - Bandra, P.S.- Piyar, DisttMuzaffarpur ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Ms.Bela Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-02-2026 Heard the parties.

2. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection Piar P.S. Case No. 62 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 302, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 21.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 51162/2024 which reads as under:- Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.This application for grant of regular bail arises out of Piyar P.S. Case No.62 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the F.I.R., the petitioner had caught hold the deceased and co-accused Sandip Choudhary inflicted knife blows upon the deceased.

4. Considering the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, I am not inclined to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.73726 of 2025(3) dt.11-02-2026 2/2 grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail. Accordingly, this bail application is rejected.

5. As the charges have been framed, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same as early as possible.

3. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he is custody since 15.04.2024.

4. Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court finds no ground to review its earlier order.

5. Learned counsel for the informant undertakes to produce the witness on the date fixed in the trial court and the learned trial judge is directed to conclude the trial at the earliest and he shall not grant unnecessary adjournments.

6. Accordingly, this application is dismissed again. (Sandeep Kumar, J) tusharika/- U T