Patna High CourtCR. MISC./75781/2025bail rejected

Manjay Kumar @ Manjay Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

2025-10-31Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.75781 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2024 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Manjay Kumar @ Manjay Sahni S/O Birendra Sahni @ Brind Sahni R/O Dih Buchouli, P.S.- Jandaha, District- Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 31-10-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Jandaha (Mahusour) P.S. Case No. 71 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier vide order dated 15.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 19902 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the specific allegation of firing upon the deceased against the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 05.11.2024 without any rhymes or reason. Learned counsel further

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.75781 of 2025(2) dt.31-10-2025 2/2 submitted that charge-sheet has been submitted in the present case against the petitioner on 04.01.2025 but till date neither cognizance has been taken nor charges have been framed. He further contended that during course of investigation, independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution case.

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

7. This Court finds no fresh ground to re-consider the matter which has already been decided on merit by this Court.

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 six months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of six 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