Patna High Court
Mantun Rai @ Mintu Rai @ Mantu RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that continued pre‑trial detention of the appellant violated Article 21 and therefore bail must be granted.
Summary
The appellant, Mantun Rai, appealed against the order of the Exclusive Special Judge rejecting his bail application in a case under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the SC/ST Act. He had been in custody since 28 January 2025, with no criminal antecedents and none of the nine prosecution witnesses examined. The counsel argued that the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, making continued detention a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution. The State opposed bail. The Patna High Court, noting the prolonged pre‑trial incarceration and the lack of progress in the trial, held that such detention served no purpose other than punitive, contravening the spirit of Article 21, and therefore granted bail with conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the appellant is entitled to bail under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act given the facts of the case.
- Whether the continued pre‑trial detention violates the fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
- Whether the delay in trial proceedings justifies the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 115(2), 126(2), 3(5), 64(1)
- SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act — s. 3(1), 3(1) घ, 3(1) द
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Fundamental rights
- SC/ST Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.494 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2025 Thana- PHULWARIA District- Begusarai
======================================================
Mantun Rai @ Mintu Rai @ Mantu Rai S/O Shubansh Rai @ Subansh Rai
R/O Village- Bishahar Asthan Mushahari, Ward No. 15, P.S- Phulwaria,
Distt.- Begusarai.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Khushi Kumari D/O Manoj Paswan R/O Village- Bishahar Ashthan
Mushahari, Ward No. 15, P.S- Phuwlaria, Distt.- Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Aditya Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Usha Kumari 1, SPP
For the Informant : None
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 15-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned SPP
for the State. None appears for the informant, despite
information given by learned SPP for the State.
2. The instant appeal has been filed by the appellant
against the order dated 20.01.2026, passed by learned Exclusive
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Begusarai whereby the prayer for
bail of the appellant in connection with Phulwaria PS Case No.
11 of 2025 under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 64(1) & 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3(1), 3(1) द, 3(1) घ
of SC/ST Act was rejected.
3. Earlier, vide order dated 24.07.2025, passed in Cr.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.494 of 2026(5) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
Appeal (SJ) No. 1820 of 2025, regular bail of the appellant was
rejected by this Court with liberty to renew his prayer for bail if
the trial is not concluded within a period of six months.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the
present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the
petitioner. It has been mainly submitted on behalf of the
appellant that the appellant is in custody since 28.01.2025,
having no criminal antecedent. It is submitted that out of nine
(9) prosecution witnesses, none has been examined in this case.
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,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.494 of 2026(5) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
which is antithetical to the spirit of Article 21 of the
Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
appellant.
7. Let the appellant be released on bail on furnishing
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Phulwaria PS Case
No. 11 of 2025, 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)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.