Patna High Court
Praveen Kumar @ Parveen Singh @ Praveen Singh @ Parvin Kumar Singh @ Praveen Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The High Court allowed the appeal and granted bail, holding that continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21.
Summary
The appellant, Praveen Kumar, appealed against the denial of bail in a case involving charges under IPC sections 302, 201, 34 and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. The High Court noted that the appellant had been in custody since 27 April 2024 and that only three of seven witnesses had been examined, indicating that the trial was far from conclusion. The court held that continued pre‑trial detention would amount to punitive incarceration and violate the appellant's fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. Consequently, the court set aside the order of the Exclusive Special Judge and granted bail on the condition of a Rs.15,000 bond with two sureties and compliance with procedural conditions. The appeal was therefore allowed, and the appellant was released on bail.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences under IPC and the SC/ST Act
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- IPC
- SC/ST Act
- fundamental rights
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4147 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-282 Year-2024 Thana- BARH District- Patna
======================================================
Praveen Kumar @ Parveen Singh @ Praveen Singh @ Parvin Kumar Singh
@ Praveen Kumar Singh S/O Ram Babu Singh R/O Village- Bhatgaon, P.S.-
Barh, District- Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Nunu Lal Kumar S/O Fagu Paswan R/O Village- Bhatgaon, P.S.- Barh,
District- Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Prem Kumar, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
For the Informant : Mr. Chetanand Paswan, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned
Special Public Prosecutor for the State and learned counsel for
the informant.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 15.09.2025 passed by learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Civil Court (Sadar), Patna whereby
the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Barh P.S.
Case No. 282 of 2024 under Sections 302, 201, 34 of the Indian
Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. Earlier, vide order dated 25.03.2025 passed in Cr.
Appeal (SJ) No. 5723 of 2024, the prayer for grant of bail to the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4147 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
appellant was rejected considering the material against the
appellant in the case diary.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the
appellant. It is mainly submitted that out of seven witnesses,
only three witnesses have been examined, which is evident from
the stage report sent by learned court below itself. It has been
submitted on behalf of the appellant that the appellant is in
custody since 27.04.2024 . Learned counsel further submits that
there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near
future. Learned counsel goes on to submit that the continued
incarceration of the appellant without conclusion of trial
amounts to a gross violation of the fundamental right guaranteed
under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, which is reiterated
by Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of judgments.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, period of custody of the appellant and taking into
account the fact that continued detention of the appellant would
serve no purpose other than punitive pretrial incarceration,
which is antithetical to the spirit of Article 21 of the
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4147 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026
3/3
Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
appellant. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated
15.09.2025 passed by learned Exclusive Special Judge, SC/ST
Act, Civil Court (Sadar), Patna in connection with Barh P.S.
Case No. 282 of 2024 is hereby set aside.
7. Let the appellant, abovenamed, be released on bail
on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen
Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with
Barh P.S. Case No. 282 of 2024, subject to the following
conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the appellant.
(II) The appellant shall appear on each and every date
fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the appellant.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…