Virendra Sahani Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Bela Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh, APP For the Informant : Mr. Vakil Kumar, Adv. Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Adv. ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 12-09-2025

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP

¶13

for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

¶14

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

¶15

Sessions Trial No. 295 of 2024 arising out of Minapur P.S. Case No. 569 of 2022, lodged on 07.11.2022, under Sections 341, 323, 147, 149, 379, 506 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner has earlier been rejected by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 22.02.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 11108 of 2024 with liberty granted to the petitioner that he

¶17

may renew his prayer for bail nine months after framing of charge.

¶18

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30814 of 2025(4) dt.12-09-2025 2/3

¶19

Counsel further submits that the charge was framed on 16.05.2024, thereafter, more than one year has passed, but the trial has not been concluded. Counsel further submits that the specific allegation against the petitioner is that he gave a lathi blow on the back of the deceased. Counsel further submits that there is a land dispute between the parties. Counsel further submits that a report regarding the present stage of the trial has been called for twice, firstly in the month of July, and secondly in the month of August. Counsel also submits that the antecedent of the petitioner is clean and he has been in custody since 01.12.2023.

¶20

Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail and submits that according to his knowledge three witnesses have been examined.

¶21

Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that on the previous occasion, a report was called for, and from the said report, it transpires that out of 10 witnesses, 8 witnesses have already been examined, and only two witnesses, i.e., the doctor and the Investigating Officer, are left to be examined.

¶22

In light of the submissions made above, it transpires to this Court that no purpose would be served by

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30814 of 2025(4) dt.12-09-2025 3/3

¶24

keeping the petitioner in custody, especially when all the contesting witnesses have been examined and only the doctor and the Investigating Officer remain to be examined.

¶25

In the present facts and circumstances of this case, let the petitioner above named, be granted bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand) as mentioned in Section 2(1) (d) of the BNSS, 2023 to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge-17th, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Sessions Trial No. 295 of 2024 arising out of Minapur P.S. Case No. 569 of 2022, subject to the following conditions as laid down under Section 480(3) of the BNSS.

¶26

(Dr. Anshuman, J.)

¶27

Aman Kumar/-

Virendra Sahani v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendra Sahani v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Golu Yadav @ Gollu Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar

Sittu Mahato @ Chhotu Kumar @ Situ Mahto Vs the State of Bihar

Nitish Rai @ Nitish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Sunil Soren Vs The Uco Bank and Ors.

Mohd. Rizwan @ Md. Rizwanul Haque Vs The State of Bihar

Sahrukh Khan @ Sarukh Khan Vs The State of Bihar