Patna High Court
Kamadhin Yadav @ Bhoni YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The court held that bail could not be granted at this stage and the petition for bail was rejected.
Summary
The petitioner, Kamadhin Yadav, was convicted of firing a pistol at the informant's father, resulting in death, and has been in judicial custody since July 2023. He previously applied for bail, which was denied on 17 March 2025 with a direction that he could reapply after six months if the trial was not concluded. The petitioner now seeks bail again, arguing that charges were framed on 4 June 2025 and no witness has yet been examined, with the trial expected to finish within three months. The High Court, noting the seriousness of the offence and the pending trial, declined to grant bail at this stage, but allowed the petitioner to renew his bail application after three months. The court also directed the trial court to conduct a calendar trial to ensure the trial concludes within three months.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail at this stage of the criminal proceedings
- Whether the delay in trial and lack of witness examination justify granting bail
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- judicial custody
- pistol shooting
- murder
- trial delay
- calendar trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88379 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2012 Thana- BARH District- Patna
======================================================
Kamadhin Yadav @ Bhoni Yadav, Son of Late Subhash Yadav, R/O village -
Soima, P.S.- Barh, District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Advocate
Ms. Shruti Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 18-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
earlier the bail petition of this petitioner was rejected by this Court
vide order dated 17.03.2025 with an observation that petitioner
will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after six months if the
trial is not concluded. It has also been submitted that the petitioner
is languishing in judicial custody since 06.07.2023.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has
fired with pistol at the father of the informant due to which he
died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further
submitted that from perusal of the status report of the learned trial
Court, it is clear that charges were framed on 04.06.2025 and till
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88379 of 2025(3) dt.18-02-2026
2/2
today no witness has been examined. Learned trial Court has
reported that the trial will be concluded within three months.
5. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the
case, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at
this stage and, as such, his prayer for bail stands again rejected.
6. However, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his
prayer for bail after three months.
7. Learned trial Court is directed to conduct calendar
trial of the petitioner so that the trial may be concluded within
three months. Calendar trial means fixing the date in advance
and dates to be informed to all the concerned including D.M and
S.P. with a direction to furnish the evidence.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
lata/-
U T
Checking your session…