Sanjay Yadav @ Chonga Vs The State of Bihar

regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial no.534/20/219/20 (arising out of Vishnupad P.S. Case no.243 of 2019) registered under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.

¶16

As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have shot the elder brother of the informant.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the earlier prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected on several occasions, the last being vide order dated 13.9.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. no.48891 of 2024. Inspite of the petitioner having remained in custody since 17.12.2019, the trial has still not concluded for no fault of this petitioner. The petitioner

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21534 of 2025(4) dt.20-06-2025 2/3

¶19

undertakes to cooperate in the trial and to abide by any conditions which may be laid by this Court for his release on bail. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 18.7.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal no.2790 of 2024.

¶20

The application for bail is opposed by learned A.P.P. for the State who submits that the petitioner is the sole assailant of the deceased and the trial is near its conclusion. In fact, the case was fixed for judgment in the learned trial Court when the co-accused absconded.

¶21

A report was called for from the learned trial Court. As per the report received contained in letter dated 16.5.2025 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge 1^st , Gaya, the case was fixed for judgment on 5.4.2025 when a petition under section 317(1) of the Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of two other co-accused persons, however, the prayer made therein was rejected, their bail bond was cancelled and non-bailable warrants issued against both of them. It further transpires from the record that subsequently vide order dated 29.4.2025, process under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued on 2.5.2025 and a copy of the order has also been sent to the various authorities including the S.S.P., Gaya and the I.G., Magadh Range, Gaya.

¶22

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21534 of 2025(4) dt.20-06-2025 3/3

¶23

On a query by this Court as to whether any petition had been filed on behalf of the petitioner for splitting the case of the petitioner with the other co-accused who were not appearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no instructions.

¶24

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation against the petitioner who is said to be the assailant of the elder brother of the informant together with the trial having reached near its conclusion with the case having been fixed for judgment, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

¶25

(Partha Sarthy, J)

¶26

Saurabh/-

Sanjay Yadav @ Chonga v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Yadav @ Chonga v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Krishna Jaiswal Vs The State of Bihar

Amar Kumar Sinha Vs The State of Bihar

Tamanna Ali Sheikh @ Tamanne Ali Sheikh @ Md. Tamanne Ali Sheikh @ Tamanne Ali Vs The State of Bihar

Sanjay Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Binod Mahto @ Vinod Mahto Vs The State of Bihar