Patna High CourtCR. MISC./8448/2026disposed

Babita Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2026-02-25Mr. Justice Jitendra Kumar3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8448 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-333 Year-2024 Thana- NOORSARAI District- Nalanda ====================================================== Babita Devi, Wife of Tuntun Ram Resident of Village- Dharampur, P.S.- Noor Sarai, District- Nalanda ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Saubhagya Suman, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr. Nagendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 25-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Noor Sarai P.S. Case No. 333 of 2024 dated 24.07.2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections, 103(1), 238 and 3(5) of B.N.S. 2023.

3. The previous petition of the petitioner for regular bail was already rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.01.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. 80693 of 2024 in view of serious nature of offence and meterials on record. Hence, the present petition has been filed praying for regular bail on no new ground except the passage of time since 17.01.2025, the date of rejection of the previous regular bail petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8448 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026 2/3 charge has been framed on 16.06.2025 and case is at the stage of prosecution evidence, but till date no prosecution witness has been examined.

5. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for about one year and seven months i.e. since 24.07.2024.

6. It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

7. However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail.

9. Considering the serious nature of the offence and materials on record, I am not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

10. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected.

11. However, learned Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude it within next one year, failing which, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew her prayer for regular bail.

12. The Superintendent of Police, Nalanda at Biharsharif, is also directed to ensure that the witnesses in this case appear before learned court below for examination as per prosecution witnesses.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8448 of 2026(3) dt.25-02-2026 3/3

13. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Superintendent of Police, Nalanda at Biharsharif as well as learned trial court.

(Jitendra Kumar, J) S.Ali/- U T