Mintu Paswan v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74833 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-216 Year-2020 Thana- KHANPURA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Mintu Paswan S/o Saryug Paswan R/o Village- Nathudar, P.S.- Khanpur, District- Samastipur .. ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .. ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Madhav Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 18-03-2026 Heard Mr. Madhav Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha, learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 09.02.2024 in connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 216 of 2020, F.I.R. dated 15.11.2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 364, 120B. Later on section 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code was added.
3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.12.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 50366 of 2024.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the FIR is false and fabricated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74833 of 2025(5) dt.18-03-2026 2/3 and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.
5. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, on the basis of material available on record and the case diary vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that it has come during investigation that the petitioner has committed present crime in question and as per allegation in the FIR, the petitioner was also accompanied with the co-accused, namely, Niraj Paswan and killed the son of the informant.
6. Vide order dated 30.01.2026, a report was called for with regard to the stage of the trial. Report of the learned Trial Court dated 26.02.2026 reveals that the prosecution evidence and the defence evidence have already been closed and now the case is fixed for argument of defence.
7. Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner as alleged in the FIR as well as the report of the learned Trial Court, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Khanpur P.S. Case No. 216 of 2020, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Samastipur.
8. Prayer is refused.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74833 of 2025(5) dt.18-03-2026 3/3
9. However, the learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ranjeet/- U T