Krishna Paswan @ Krishn Kumar v. The State of Bihar
CR. MISC./50637/2025 · 2025-07-29
Rajesh Kumar Verma
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 58686 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 58686 (PAT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50637 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-70 Year-2023 Thana- RUNISAIDPUR District- Sitamarhi ======================================================
1. Krishna Paswan @ Krishn Kumar S/O Chandeshwar Paswan Resident of village- Runnisaidpur, PS-Runnisaidpur, Distt-Sitamarhi
2. Jagtaran Devi W/O Chandeshwar Paswan Resident of village- Runnisaidpur, PS-Runnisaidpur, Distt-Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 2 29-07-2025 Heard Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Brajendra Nath Pandey, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Ranisaidpur P.S. Case No. 70 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 07.02.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 498(A), 324, 326, 307, 302, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Earlier the petitioners moved before this Hon’ble Court for grant of anticipatory bail in Cr. Misc. No. 49570 of 2023, but the same was rejected vide order dated 12.10.2023.
4. The petitioners have again approached this Hon’ble
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50637 of 2025(2) dt.29-07-2025 2/2 Court for grant of anticipatory bail after their earlier anticipatory bail application was rejected vide order dated 12.10.2023. However, once the petitioners’ earlier anticipatory bail application has been rejected, there is no occasion to entertain their second anticipatory bail application.
5. Hence, the second anticipatory bail application of the petitioners is not maintainable and the same stands dismissed accordingly.
Suruchi/- (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) U T