Pramod KumarversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28119 of 2026
                         Arising Out of PS. Case No.-121 Year-2025 Thana- TEKARI District- Gaya
                 ======================================================
           1.     Pramod Kumar Son of Akhilesh Yadav Resident of Mahmana, P.S.- Tekari,
                  District - Gaya.
           2.    Vikash Kumar @ Vikash Yadav Son of Lalu Yadav Resident of Mahmana,
                 P.S.- Tekari, District - Gaya.

                                                                                   ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                        Versus
                 The State of Bihar Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :        Mr.Ravi Kumar
                 For the Opposite Party/s :        Mr.Surendra Kumar
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   08-05-2026               1.    Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and

                   learned A.P.P. for the State.

                             2.    The petitioners seek bail in a case registered for the

                   offences punishable under Sections 126(1), 126(2), 115(2),

                   118(1), 117(2), 109, 324(4), 324(5), 103 and 3(5) of the

                   Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

                             3.    Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

                   petitioners are in custody since 08.03.205, are persons with

                   clean antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted in the

                   case.

                             4.    Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

                   petitioners had earlier moved this Court seeking regular bail by
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28119 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
                                            2/4




          filing Cr. Misc. No. 55165 of 2025 and the same came to be

          rejected vide order dated 24.02.2026 with liberty to the

          petitioners to renew their prayer after framing of charge.

          Learned counsel submits that the charges against the petitioners

          stands framed by an order dated 27.02.2026 as such in terms of

          liberty so granted, the instant regular bail application has been

          filed.

                   5.     Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel

          appearing on behalf of informant vehemently opposes the prayer

          for bail of the petitioners. The learned counsel appearing on

          behalf of informant submits that no doubt charges against the

          petitioners have been framed but then allegation is of causing

          death of the victim on account of assault made by the

          petitioners. It is further submitted that altogether there are six

          prosecution witnesses and after framing of charge on 27.02.2026

          two prosecutio10. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned

          District Judge, Gaya for its onward communication to the

          concerned court, District Magistrate and Senior Superintendent

          of Police. n witnesses have been examined. It is also submitted

          that the informant will ensure that all the witnesses are brought

          before the court in the trial for recording their evidence without

          any delay. It is thus submitted that since trial has commenced
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28119 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
                                            3/4




          and prosecution witnesses are being examined and as such

          merely because liberty was granted to renew the prayer for bail

          that in itself does not entitle the petitioners for being released on

          bail, it is submitted that liberty no doubt was granted but then

          the same requires consideration in view of the subsequent

          development which have taken place.

                   6.     After hearing learned counsel for the parties, the

          Court is in agreement with the submission made by learned

          counsel for the10. Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned

          District Judge, Gaya for its onward communication to the

          concerned court, District Magistrate and Senior Superintendent

          of Police.        informant thus is not inclined to release the

          petitioners on bail.

                   7.     However, it is directed that the learned trial court

          shall ensure that no unnecessary adjournments are given in the

          trial as it has been submitted by learned counsel appearing on

          behalf of informant that informant will produce the witnesses as

          and when directed by learned trial court. It is further made clear

          that if the trial is not concluded within four months from the

          date of receipt/production of the order for no fault of the

          petitioners, the petitioners would be at liberty to renew their

          prayer for bail.
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28119 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
                                                        4/4




                                   8.    Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned

                      District Judge, Gaya for its onward communication to the

                      concerned court, District Magistrate and Senior Superintendent

                      of Police.



                                                (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Ranjeet/-

U      T