Patna High Court

CR. MISC./50015/2026 of Janak Kishore Pradhan @ Jan Kishore Vs The State of Bihar on 24 July 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50015 of 2026 In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.203 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-311 Year-2021 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1. Janak Kishore Pradhan @ Jan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50015 of 2026

In

CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.203 of 2026

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-311 Year-2021 Thana- SAMASTIPUR COMPLAINT CASE

District- Samastipur

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

1.

Janak Kishore Pradhan @ Jan Kishore S/O Late Rambriksh Pradhan Resident of Village and P.S.- Chakmehsi, District- Samastipur.

2.

Mukesh Pradhan S/O Late Om Prakash Pradhan Resident of Village and P.S.- Chakmehsi, District- Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar

2.

Pramila Devi W/O Ashok Kumar Mahto R/O Ward No. 05, Village and P.S.- Chakmehsi, Distt.- Samastipur.

... ... Opposite Party/s

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr.Mukesh Kumar Thakur

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Bharat Bhushan

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

ORAL ORDER

24-07-2026

1. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submits that appellants along with three other accused had moved this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 203 of 2026, it is also submitted that Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 203 of 2026 was allowed by an order dated 17.06.2026 with a direction to the appellants to appear before the learned Trial Court on 02.07.2026 and the learned Trial Court was directed to dispose of their cases on the same Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50015 of 2026(2) dt.24-07-2026

day. It is next submitted that out of five appellants in Criminal Appeal (SJ) No. 203 of 2026 only three appellants could appear before the learned Trial Court on 02.07.2026 and were granted bail on the same day, but the instant appellants of the modification application could not appear before the learned Trial Court on 02.07.2026 for the reason that appellant no. 2, herein, Mukesh Pradhan was operated for brain tumor at AIIMS, New Delhi, in the modification application also it is pleaded that appellant no. 2 was under treatment at AIIMS.

3. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State submits that though modification application has been filed seeking extension of time for surrender but then no documentary evidence is not on record with regard to brain tumor operation of the appellant no. 2, it is also submitted that the appellants will have to bring on record on affidavit the date on which appellant no. 2 was admitted at AIIMS, the date on which he was operated and the date on which he was discharged.

4. On query of the Court from the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants that as to why appellant no. 1 did not surrender on time, on which it is submitted that appellant no. 1 is uncle of the appellant no. 2 and appellant no. 2

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.50015 of 2026(2) dt.24-07-2026

does not have a father, as such appellant no. 1 was with appellant no. 2 at AIIMS as an attendant. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants next submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant modification application with liberty to file a fresh anticipatory bail application on behalf of the instant appellants seeking on the grounds raised in the instant modification application along with all the relevant documents.

5. Permission is accorded.

6. Accordingly, the modification application is dismissed.

vikram/- (Satyavrat Verma, J) U T

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead