Dinesh Chaudhary @ Ganesh Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78218 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-190 Year-2024 Thana- KURTHA District- Jehanabad ====================================================== Dinesh Chaudhary @ Ganesh Chaudhary Son of Lakhan Chaudhary R/o - Helalpur, P.S - Kinjar, District - Arwal.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, 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 Kurtha P.S. Case No. 190 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 103(1) and 238 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3.

This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 19.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 83346 of 2024 taking into account the material against the petitioner in the case diary. 4.

In compliance of the order dated 13.11.2025, a report dated 19.11.2025 with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78218 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026 2/2 appears that charge has been framed against the petitioner on 26.03.2025. It is further reported that total five charge-sheeted witnesses have been examined in this case.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 14.08.2024 without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal antecedent.

6.

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 7.

There is no new ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner.

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 two months from today. (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T