Patna High Court
Jai Prakash Patel @ Jay Prakash Patel @ Jayprakash PatelversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the trial court’s rejection of bail, directing the trial to be expedited.
Summary
The appellant, Jai Prakash Patel, appealed to the Patna High Court against the order of the District and Additional Sessions Judge rejecting his bail application in a case registered under IPC Section 376D and several provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The trial is at an advanced stage with six charge‑sheeted witnesses, four of whom have already been examined, and the court expects to conclude the trial within three months. The appellant argued that he has been in judicial custody since June 2024 without sufficient justification. The State opposed bail, relying on a Supreme Court decision (X v. State of Rajasthan, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539) that courts should be loath to grant bail once trial has commenced in serious offences such as rape. The High Court found no fresh ground to revisit the bail petition, noted the trial’s progress, and consequently dismissed the appeal, directing the lower court to expedite the trial within three months, after which the appellant may re‑apply for bail.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused of a serious offence (rape) under IPC 376D and SC/ST Act provisions when the trial is at an advanced stage.
- Whether the appellant has any fresh ground to merit reconsideration of the bail application.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 376D
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 2(v), 3(i)(r)(s)(w)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- IPC 376D
- SC/ST Act
- advanced trial stage
- high court appeal
- expedited trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4485 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-267 Year-2024 Thana- RAMNAGAR District- West Champaran
======================================================
Jai Prakash Patel @ Jay Prakash Patel @ Jayprakash Patel Son of Prabhu
Patel @ Prabhu Raut Resident of Village- Nepali Tola, Ward No. 01, P.S.-
Ramnagar, District- West Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Jyoti Kumari D/o Late Gauri Shankar Mahto Resident of Village-
Banwariya, P.S.- Sahodara, District- West Champaran, Presently Resident of
Village- House of Prema Vikaram Sah Nepali Tola, Raj Darbar, P.S.-
Ramnagar, District- West Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sarvesh Kashyap, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mrs. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 12-03-2026 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 27.09.2025 passed by learned District
and Additional Sessions Judge Ist cum Special Judge, SC/ST
Act, Bettiah, West Champaran whereby the prayer for bail of the
appellant in connection with Ramnagar P.S. Case No. 267 of
2024 under Sections 376D of the Indian Penal Code and
Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(w), 2(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. Earlier vide order dated 08.05.2025 passed in Cr.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4485 of 2025(4) dt.12-03-2026
2/3
Appeal (SJ) No. 41 of 2025 regular bail of the appellant was
rejected by this Court considering the specific and heinous
nature of allegation against the appellant.
4. In compliance of the order dated 15.01.2026 a report
dated 31.01.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial has
been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears
that there are six charge-sheeted witnesses and out of which,
four witnesses have been examined. It is further reported that
trial is likely to be concluded in the next three months.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 19.06.2024
without any rhymes or reason.
6. Learned SPP for the State opposes the prayer for grant
of bail. Learned SPP for the State relied upon a decision of the
Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539
(X. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein in paragraph no. 14,
the Hon’ble Apex Court has held has under:
“14. Ordinarily in serious offences like rape,
murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial commences and
the prosecution starts examining its witnesses, the
Court, be it the Trial Court or the High Court
should be loath in entertaining the bail application
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4485 of 2025(4) dt.12-03-2026
3/3
of the accused.”
7. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail petition
of the appellant. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the
trial is going on and is at an advance stage.
8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
appellant is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously
preferably within a period of three months from today. If the
trial is not concluded within the period of three months, as
stated above, the appellant will be at liberty to renew his prayer
before the court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…