Patna High Court
Baidhnath Prasad @ Baidhnath Prasad JaiswalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the appellant, subject to a bond and surety conditions, as his age and health mitigated the risk of flight or interference with the trial.
Summary
Baidhnath Prasad, an 82‑year‑old accused, was charged under several IPC sections (341, 323, 324, 506, 504/34) and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for offences arising from a 2023 case. His earlier applications for anticipatory bail were rejected by the Special Judge, the High Court and the Supreme Court, leading to his arrest in October 2025. He subsequently applied for regular bail after the charge‑sheet was filed, arguing that his advanced age and ill health made him unlikely to abscond or tamper with evidence. The Special Public Prosecutor opposed bail, citing twelve prior cases against the appellant and the seriousness of the offences. The Patna High Court, after weighing the appellant’s age, health, and lack of flight risk, ordered his release on bail conditioned on a Rs 10,000 bond, two sureties of equal amount, and the requirement that one surety be his daughter, Neelam Kumari. The court also empowered the trial judge to cancel the bail if the appellant’s release caused any delay in the trial.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail should be granted to an elderly, ailing accused facing serious IPC and SC/ST Act offences despite a history of multiple cases.
- Whether the appellant’s age and health constitute sufficient grounds to outweigh the risk of absconding or tampering with evidence.
- Whether bail can be conditioned on specific sureties and subject to cancellation by the trial court if the trial is delayed.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 324, 34, 341, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(i), 3(r), 3(s)
Subjects
- bail
- anticipatory bail
- regular bail
- SC/ST Act
- IPC
- age factor
- health of accused
- surety
- flight risk
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.1795 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-274 Year-2023 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Baidhnath Prasad @ Baidhnath Prasad Jaiswal Son of Late Gorakh Prasad @
Gorakh Ram Resident of Village- Ghorasahan, Ward No. 03, P.S.-
Ghorasahan, District- East Champaran at Motihari, BIhar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mukesh Baitha Son of Jagarnath Baitha Resident of Village- Athmohan,
P.S.- Jharokhar, District- East Champaran, BIhar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Rajiv Prashant
For the Respondent/s : Ms.Usha Kumari 1
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 06-07-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the
learned Special Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The appellant has challenged the order dated
13.04.2026 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act,
East Champaran, Motihari in connection with Trial No.50 of
2026 arising out of Ghorasahan P. S. Case No. 274 of 2023,
instituted for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 324, 506,
504/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(r)(s) of the
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)
Act, whereby his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail has been
rejected.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1795 of 2026(3) dt.06-07-2026
2/4
appellant submits that appellant is an old ailing person aged
about 82 years. It is further submitted that appellant had moved
this Court seeking anticipatory bail by filing Cr. Appeal (S.J.)
No.5061 of 2023 and the same came to be rejected by an order
dated 07.10.2024. It is further submitted that thereafter the
appellant moved before the Hon’ble Supreme Court seeking
anticipatory bail application by filing Special Leave to Appeal
(Criminal) No.7809 of 2025 and the same also came to be
rejected by an order dated 08.07.2025 and the appellant was
permitted two weeks’ time to surrender and apply for regular
bail. It is further submitted that thereafter appellant was arrested
on 06.10.2025. It is further submitted that thereafter appellant
moved this Court seeking regular bail by filing Cr. Appeal (SJ)
No.4862 of 2025 and the same was permitted to be withdrawn
by an order dated 25.02.2026 with liberty to the appellant to
renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge. It is next
submitted that charges against the appellant stands framed by an
order dated 12.03.2026.
4. At this stage, the learned counsel appearing on
behalf of the Special P.P. submits that appellant has antecedent
of 12 cases and if privilege of regular bail is granted, the
appellant may abscond, on which the learned counsel appearing
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1795 of 2026(3) dt.06-07-2026
3/4
on behalf of the appellant submits that appellant now is an old
and ailing person aged about 82 years and if privilege of regular
bail is granted, the appellant will not abscond rather will
cooperate in the trial to prove his innocence and shall not
indulge in any act of threatening the witness or tampering with
evidence.
5. The learned Special P. P. opposes the regular bail
application.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties
and considering the submission made by the learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the appellant and also taking into
consideration the age of the appellant, the appellant, above-
named, is directed to be released on bail on his furnishing bail-
bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with
two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned Special Judge, SC/ST Act, East Champaran, Motihari in
connection with Trial No.50 of 2026 arising out of Ghorasahan
P. S. Case No. 274 of 2023, with a condition that one of the
bailors of the appellant shall be his daughter, namely, Neelam
Kumari.
7. It is further made clear that if the learned trial court
comes to a conclusion that appellant after his release is trying
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.1795 of 2026(3) dt.06-07-2026
4/4
the delay the trial of the case in any manner, the learned trial
court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the appellant
after recording reason.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
vikash/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.