Shipu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.280 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-214 Year-2024 Thana- KONCH District- Gaya ====================================================== Shipu Kumar Son of Shivcharan Das Resident of Village- Dhan Chhuha, P.S.- Konch, District- Gayaji ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

X S/o Y Resident of Village- Dhan Chhuha, P.S.- Konch, District- Gayaji ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Syed Ehteshamuddin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Konch P.S. Case No. 214 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 366A, 504 & 34 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 on merit by this Court vide order dated 25.02.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 83650 of 2024, taking into account charge sheet being submitted under the POCSO Act and the involvement of the petitioner.

4.

In compliance of the order dated 17.01.2026, a report

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.280 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026 2/3 dated 13.02.2026, with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears that five (5) out of seven (7) charge sheet witnesses have been examined in this case. It is further reported that trial is likely to be concluded within a period of two months.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 25.06.2024, without any rhymes or reason, having no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future, hence, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

6.

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail. Learned APP has further relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3539 (X. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein in paragraph No.14, Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:

"14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape, murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial commences and the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the Court be it the Trial Court or the High Court should be loath in entertaining

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.280 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026 3/3 the bail application of the accused."

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 and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of two months from today. If the trial is not concluded within the period of two months, as stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before the court below.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T