Niraj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76376 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-98 Year-2024 Thana- SOHSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Niraj Kumar Son of Nandu Yadav @ Nandu @ Nandu Yadav @ Nanhu Yadav Resident Of Village- Malawan Dumranwan, Ps- Sare, Dist- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Sita Devi wife of Late Satyanarayan Prasad Resident Of Village- Sohdih, PsSohsarai, Dist- Nalanda ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Rudal Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Sen Prasad 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 Sohsarai P.S. Case No. 98 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 363, 366 and 366-A of the Indian Penal Code. 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 24.03.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 61261 of 2024. 4.

In compliance of the order dated 11.11.2025, 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.76376 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026 2/2 appears that two witnesses have been examined in this case. It is further reported that charge has already been framed against the petitioner on 07.04.2025 as also three charge-sheeted witnesses including the victim are yet to be examined in this case and the 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 28.04.2024 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. 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. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail before the learned Court below itself after the examination of the victim.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Rajorshi/- U T