Patna High CourtCR. MISC./84697/2025bail rejected

Dhananjay Kumar @ Dhananjay Ray v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-15Mr. Justice R. P. Mishra2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84697 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-336 Year-2024 Thana- CHAPRA MUFFASIL District- Saran ====================================================== Dhananjay Kumar @ Dhananjay Ray S/O Vijay Rai R/o -Methwalia, P.S. -Chapra Muffasil, Distt.- Saran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Bishweshwar Ram, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 15-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.Tr. No. 898 of 2025, arising out of Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 336 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 07.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 26413 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court considering the heinous nature of allegation against the petitioner, with a direction to learned court below to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same at the earliest.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.02.2025

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84697 of 2025(2) dt.15-01-2026 2/2 without any rhymes or reason.

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

6. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition of the petitioner.

7. 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 five months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of five months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

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