Patna High CourtCR. MISC./74779/2025bail rejected

Satyendra Sah v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-09Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74779 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2024 Thana- PURNAHYA District- Sheohar ====================================================== Satyendra Sah S/O Harichandra Sah @ Harishchandra Sah R/O VillageParsauni Gop, Sonaul Sultan, P.S- Purnahiya, Distt.- Sheohar. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Ram Priya Sharan Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Tr. No. 14 of 2025 arising out of Purnahiya P.S. Case No. 60 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 137(2), 140(3), 96, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and later on Section 103(1), 238 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

3. Earlier vide order dated 17.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 81521 of 2024 regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the nature of accusation and gravity of offence.

4. In compliance of the order dated 31.10.2025 a report dated 04.11.2025 with regard to the present stage of trial has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74779 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026 2/2 been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that the case is fixed for examination of prosecution witnesses. It is further reported that trial is likely to be concluded within six months.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 21.07.2024 without any rhymes or reason.

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

7. There is no fresh 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 five months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of five months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T