Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Suggan HarijanversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
REJECTED

Holding

The appeal is dismissed and bail is not granted to the appellant.

Summary

The appellant, Suggan Harijan, was charged under IPC sections 302, 201 and 34 for a murder case (Jagdishpur PS Case No. 119 of 2023). He applied for regular bail under Section 14(A)(2) of the CrPC, but his bail was rejected twice by the trial court. The appellant argued that he had been in custody since May 2023, the trial was delayed, and co‑accused had been granted bail. The trial court report indicated that all witnesses had been examined and the case was awaiting final arguments. The Patna High Court, considering the seriousness of the allegations and the trial stage, refused to enlarge bail, affirmed the lower court’s order, dismissed the appeal, and directed the trial court to expedite the proceedings.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the appellant under Section 14(A)(2) of the CrPC given the nature of the offences (IPC 302, 201, 34) and the stage of trial.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • murder
  • IPC 302
  • IPC 201
  • IPC 34
  • Criminal Procedure Code
  • appeal
  • trial stage
  • Special Judge SC/ST Act

Judgment

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1235 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-119 Year-2023 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhagalpur
                 ======================================================
                 Suggan Harijan Son of Fodari Harijan Resident of village- Harijan Tola
                 Puraini, Ps- Jagdishpur, Dist- Bhagalpur              ... ... Appellant/s
                                                     Versus
           1.     The State of Bihar
           2.     O.P. Das son of Jhethu Das Resident of village- Harijan Tola, Puraini, Ps-
                  jagdishpur, Dist- Bhagalpur
                                                                         ... ... Respondent/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Appellant/s    :        Md. Najmul Hodda, Advocate
                 For the Respondent/s   :        Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

4   25-06-2026                   Heard Md. Najmul Hodda, learned counsel for the

                   appellant as well as Mr. Binay Krishna, learned Spl.P.P. for the

                   State.

                               2. This is an appeal under Sections 14(A)(2) against

                   refusal of the prayer for regular bail by order dated 24.02.2026

                   passed by the learned Court of Additional District & Sessions

                   Judge-III-cum-Special Judge / SC/ST Act, Bhagalpur in

                   connection with Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 119 of 2023, F.I.R.

                   dated 08.03.2023 registered under Sections 302, 201 and 34 of

                   the IPC.

                               3. Earlier the bail application of the appellant has been

                   rejected twice vide order dated 30.09.2024 in Cr. Appeal (SJ)

                   No. 4705 of 2023 and vide order dated 12.12.2025 in Cr. Appeal

                   (SJ) No. 3790 of 2025.
            Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1235 of 2026(4) dt.25-06-2026
                                                         2/2




                                   4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

                      appellant is in custody since 02.05.2023 and the trial is not in

                      progress and other accused persons have been granted bail by

                      this Court and by Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

                                   5. Vide order dated 07.05.2026 a report was called

                      with regard to the stage of the trial. Report of the learned trial

                      court dated 14.05.2026 reveals that all the witnesses have been

                      examined and the case is pending for final argument.

                                   6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State has

                      vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the appellant.

                                   7. Considering the nature of allegation as alleged in

                      the FIR as well as report of the learned trial court, I am not

                      inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail in connection with

                      Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 119 of 2023 pending in the Court of

                      learned Additional District & Sessions Judge-III-cum-Special

                      Judge / SC/ST Act, Bhagalpur.

                                   8. Accordingly, the impugned order is affirmed and

                      this appeal stands dismissed.

                                   9. However, learned trial court is directed to expedite

                      and conclude the trial at the earliest.


                                             (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Vanisha/-
U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.