Dharmendra @ Dhano ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88301 of 2025
                      Arising Out of PS. Case No.-171 Year-2024 Thana- SOHSARAI District- Nalanda
                 ======================================================
                 Dharmendra @ Dhano Chaudhary, S/o Raman Chaudhary Resident of - Badi
                 Pahari, Mansoor Nagar, P.S - Rajgir, District - Nalanda

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

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr.Ritesh Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   06-02-2026                     Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in

                   connection with Sessions Trial No. 903 of 2024, arising out of

                   Sohsarai P.S. Case No. 171 of 2024, registered for the alleged

                   offences under Sections 103, 3(5) of BNS and Section 27 of the

                   Arms Act.

                                3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner shot dead

                   the wife of the informant.

                                4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   this is the second attempt of the petitioner to seek bail from this

                   Court. Earlier, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected

                   vide order dated 03.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 33791 of

                   2025. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88301 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
                                            2/3




          in custody since 20.07.2024, but the trial has not been

          concluded till date. The learned counsel further submits that

          there is altogether 12 prosecution witnesses, but only 7

          witnesses have been examined till date.              So, there is no

          likelihood of early conclusion of trial. The learned counsel

          further submits that there is no substantive material against the

          petitioner.

                        5. The learned APP vehemently opposes the

          submission made on behalf of the petitioner. The learned APP

          submits that no fresh ground has been brought on record for

          reconsideration of prayer of bail and the period of custody could

          not be a ground.

                        6. A report dated 27.01.2026 has been received from

          the learned trial court about the present stage of trial wherein the

          learned trial court has submitted that out of 12 charge sheet

          witnesses, 7 witnesses have been examined. Against the

          remaining witnesses, summons were issued. The learned trial

          court further submitted that if the witnesses are produced within

          time, the trial would be concluded within four months.

                        7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and

          submission made on behalf of the parties, I do not find any new

          ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Hence,
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88301 of 2025(3) dt.06-02-2026
                                                       3/3




                     his prayer for grant of bail is rejected.

                                  8. However, the learned trial court is directed to abide

                     by its undertaking and dispose of the matter at the earliest.

                                  9. At the same time, the Superintendent of Police,

                     Nalanda at Biharsharif is directed to ensure the presence of

                     remaining prosecution witnesses on the dates fixed before the

                     learned trial court. In case, the Superintendent of Police fails to

                     produce the witnesses on the dates fixed, he will be called

                     before this Court to explain the circumstances.



                                               (Arun Kumar Jha, J)
V.K.Pandey/-

U      T