Ajay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81299 of 2025

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-560 Year-2024 Thana- GAUTAMBUDHNAGAR DistrictSiwan

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Ajay Kumar S/o Swaminath Prasad, Resident of Panchapakadiya, Padumpati, Kala Dumra, P.S.- G.B. Nagar, District- Siwan.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar ===============	... ... Opposite Part =======================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s	: Mr. N. K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate Mr. Mithilesh Kr. Upadhyay, Advocate Ms. Tetara Kumari, Advocate Mr. Raju Prasad, Advocate
For the State	: Mr. Gulnar Begum, APP
For the Informant ===============	: Mr. Sandeep Kumar Mishra, Advocate =======================================

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER

¶10

5 25-02-2026

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.

¶12

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Gautam Budha Nagar P.S. Case No. 560 of 2024 dated 05.11.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 103(1) and 61(2) of BNS Act, 2023.

¶13

The petitioner has moved this Court previously also for regular bail. However, the same was rejected by this Court vide order dated 19.02.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. 9049 of 2025 in view of direct allegation of fatal assault by the petitioner to the deceased.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

¶15

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81299 of 2025(5) dt.25-02-2026 2/3

¶16

petitioner has been in custody since 25.11.2024 i.e. for about one year and three months and in this case, trial is proceeding at snail pace. Despite framing of charge, no witnesses has been examined.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

In view of serious allegation and material on record against the petitioner, I am not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

¶20

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

¶21

However, Article 21 of the Constitution of India demands that there should be expeditious trial. Hence, learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial within next eleven months, failing which the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail.

¶22

The Superintendent of Police, Siwan, is also directed to ensure that the prosecution witnesses in this case appear before learned Trial Court for their examination as prosecution witnesses.

¶23

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81299 of 2025(5) dt.25-02-2026 3/3

¶24

Let a copy of this order be sent to the

¶25

Superintendent of Police, Siwan as well as learned Trial Court.

¶26

ravishankar/-

¶27

U T

Ajay Kumar v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar 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

Chunchun Kumar Sah @ Chunchun Sah Vs The State of Bihar

Karan Kumar @ Karan Yadav Vs The State of Bihar

Samina Khatoon @ Asmina Khatoon Vs The State of Bihar

Ram Sundra Singh @ Ram Sundar Singh Vs The State of Bihar

Amarnath Prajapatti and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Raja Ram Bhuiyan Vs The State of Bihar