Patna High Court
Prabhu YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The appeal was dismissed and bail was not granted.
Summary
The appellant, Prabhu Yadav, was charged under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act for serious offences including murder, attempt to murder and offences against the person. His bail application was rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, prompting an appeal to the Patna High Court. The appellant argued innocence and the need for bail due to the prolonged custody, while the State and the informant contended that the trial was nearing completion and cited Supreme Court precedent discouraging bail in serious cases once trial has commenced. The High Court, relying on the principle that courts should be loath to grant bail for serious offences when the trial is advanced, dismissed the appeal and ordered the trial court to expedite the proceedings. No bail was granted.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused of serious offences when the trial is on the verge of conclusion.
- Whether the Supreme Court's observation in X v. State of Rajasthan (2024) is applicable to deny bail in the present case.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 324, 325, 341, 504, 506
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v)(va)
Subjects
- bail
- serious offences
- Indian Penal Code
- SC/ST Act
- high court appeal
- trial expeditious
- precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4791 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2024 Thana- MARAUNA District- Supaul
======================================================
Prabhu Yadav S/O Ramdas Yadav R/O- Vill- Kamrail Bhagwait Tola, P.S-
Marauna, Distt- Supaul.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ugranarayan Chaupal S/O Ramdev Chaupal R/O Village- Bhagwit, P.S-
Marauna, Distt.- Supaul.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Ms. Priyanka Singh, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan, SPP
For the Informant : Mr. Amarnath Jha, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 05-02-2026 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 10.11.2025 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I-cum-Special Judge, SC/ST, Supaul whereby
the prayer for bail of the appellant in connection with Marauna
PS Casse No. 48 of 2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341,
323, 324, 325, 307, 302, 504 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code
and Sections 3(1)(r)(s), 3(2)(v)(va) of SC/ST Act was rejected.
Earlier vide order dated 19.06.2025, passed in Cr. Appeal (SJ)
No. 22 of 2025, appeal of the appellant was dismissed by this
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4791 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2026
2/3
Court, taking into account the nature and gravity of the offence
and trial is in progress.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
appellant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the
present case. The appellant is in custody since 17.05.2024 and
has six criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the appellant
submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in
the near future, hence, appellant may be released on bail.
4. Learned Special P.P. for the State and the informant
have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the
appellant. It is mainly submitted that all the prosecution
witnesses have been examined in this case and trial is on the
verge of its conclusion. Learned APP has further 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, Hon’ble Apex Court has observed as 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 of the accused.”
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4791 of 2025(2) dt.05-02-2026
3/3
5. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances
of the case and specifically taking into account the fact that trial
is on the verge of its conclusion, this Court is not inclined to
allow the appeal. Appeal is accordingly dismissed.
6. The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial as
expeditiously as possible without any undue delay and
unnecessary adjournments.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…