Patna High CourtCR. MISC./86990/2024dismissed

Dharmesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2025-06-20Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86990 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2023 Thana- ANGARGHAT District- Samastipur ====================================================== DHARMESH KUMAR S/O SHANKAR LAL RAI @ SHANKAR RAI R/o vill - Hakimabad, P.S. - Samastipur (Muffasil), Distt.- Samastipur, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Aaruni Singh, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Satyendra Narayan Singh,APP For the Informant :

Mr. Bal Krishna Mishra, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-06-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 29.11.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 74466 of 2023 .

3. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered for the offence under Sections 394 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The following order was passed on 29.11.2023 in Cr. Misc. No. 74466 of 2023 :- Heard Sri Rabi Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, learned APP for the State.

2. This application for grant of regular bail arises out of Angarghat P.S. Case No. 12 of 2023 (Sessions Trial No. 470 of 2023) registered for the offence punishable under Sections 394 and 302 of the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86990 of 2024(3) dt.20-06-2025 2/2 Indian Penal Code.

3. The petitioner and others are said to have killed the deceased while committing robbery. The petitioner is in custody since 09.02.2023. He is also an accused in a case of committing theft. During the investigation, materials have come to connect the petitioner with the crime.

4. Considering the seriousness of allegation, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail. Accordingly, this application is rejected.

5. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of this case and conclude the same as early as possible. If there is no substantial progress in the trial, the petitioner may move before this Court for bail.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 09.02.2023 and because of delay in trial the petitioner may be granted bail.

6. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that four witnesses have already been examined in the trial and rest of the witnesses shall be examined in the trial.

7. Considering these circumstances, this application for regular bail is hereby rejected.

8. The petitioner may renew his prayer for bail, if the trial is delayed by the prosecution.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) anand/- U T