Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Mantun Rai @ Mintu Rai @ Mantu RaiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

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

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


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.