Patna High CourtCR. MISC./76360/2025bail granted

Niraj Jha @ Rishi Jha v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-25Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.76360 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-148 Year-2024 Thana- BAJPATTI District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Niraj Jha @ Rishi Jha Son of Late Ramanaresh Jha @ Naresh Jha VillageRasulpur, PS- Dumra, District- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 369 of 2025 arising out of Bajpatti P.S. Case No. 148 of 2024, lodged on 26.05.2024, under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner has earlier been rejected vide order dated 05.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 85465 of 2024 with liberty granted to the petitioner that the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

4. Counsel further submits that charge was framed on 25.08.2025 and the evidence is going on. He further submits that there is only one criminal antecedent against the petitioner,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76360 of 2025(4) dt.25-02-2026 2/3 in which a final form has been submitted. Counsel further submits that the petitioner is, in fact, a victim in the present case and he has unnecessarily been in custody since 29.06.2024 without any fault.

5. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the present petitioner is directly involved in the present case therefore, bail may not be granted to him.

6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that a report regarding the present stage of the trial was called for. However, he fairly submits that, in the rejection order, liberty was granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

7. From the report, it transpires to this Court that charge was framed on 25.08.2025 and, out of nine witnesses, six are private witnesses and three are government witnesses to be examined.

8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, let the petitioner above named, be granted bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1) (d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of District & 1st Additional

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.76360 of 2025(4) dt.25-02-2026 3/3 Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 369 of 2025 arising out of Bajpatti P.S. Case No. 148 of 2024, subject to the following conditions as laid down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Aman Kumar/- U T