Patna High Court
Umesh SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal is allowed; the order denying bail is set aside and the appellant is released on bail subject to conditions.
Summary
Umesh Sahani appealed against the denial of bail in a case involving charges of murder, evidence tampering, and robbery under Sections 302, 201, 392 and 34 of the IPC, as well as provisions of the SC/ST Act. He had been in judicial custody since September 2022, and his earlier bail application was rejected based on a confessional statement and post‑mortem report. The appellant argued that his continued pre‑trial detention violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21, especially since only two of ten charge‑sheeted witnesses had been examined and the trial was expected to conclude within six months. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Patna High Court, noting that further detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21, set aside the lower court’s order and granted bail on the condition of a Rs.15,000 bond with two sureties and compliance with appearance requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences and a prior confessional statement.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention infringes the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act affect the grant of bail in this case.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34, 392
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 2(v), 3
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- IPC
- SC/ST Act
- criminal procedure
- confessional statement
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4670 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-158 Year-2022 Thana- SHANKARPUR District- Madhepura
======================================================
Umesh Sahani Son of Narayan Sahani Resident of Village - Chirhara Ward
No. 17, P.S. - Mashrakh, District - Chapra.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Bablu Paswan Son of Badri Paswan Resident of Village - Birkhi, Ward no.
25, P.S. - Mashrakh, District - Madhepura.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. N. K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna, SPP
For the Respondent No.2: None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 10-04-2026 Heard learned senior counsel for the appellant and
learned SPP for the State. Learned SPP for the state has
informed the Respondent No. 2 of this case but none appears on
behalf of the said Respondent.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 26.09.2025 passed by learned 1 st
Additional District and Session Judge-cum-Exclusive Special
Judge, Madhepura whereby the prayer for bail of the appellant
in connection with Shankarpur P.S. Case No. 158 of 2022 under
Sections 302, 201, 392/34 of the Indian Penal Code, read with
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4670 of 2025(5) dt.10-04-2026
2/4
Section 3, 2(v) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. This is the second attempt of the appellant for bail.
The appellant has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier dismissed by this Court vide order dated
04.12.2024 passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ) No. 3223 of 2023 taking
into consideration the confessional statement of the appellant
which further supported by the post-mortem report.
4. In compliance of the order dated 09.02.2026, a
report dated 18.02.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that out of ten charge-sheeted witnesses, only two
witnesses have been examined in this case. It is further reported
that the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of six
months.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 19.09.2022
without any rhymes or reason and has got one criminal
antecedent in which he is on bail. Learned counsel for the
appellant next submits 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 reiterated by Hon’ble Apex
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4670 of 2025(5) dt.10-04-2026
3/4
Court in plethora of Judgments.
6. Learned SPP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, the period of custody undergone by 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 Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to allow this
appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and order dated
26.09.2025 passed by learned 1st Additional District and Session
Judge-cum-Exclusive Special Judge, Madhepura is hereby set
aside.
8. Let the appellant 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 Shankarpur P.S.
Case No. 158 of 2022, 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
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4670 of 2025(5) dt.10-04-2026
4/4
consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the
bail bonds of the appellant.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…