Patna High Court
Ramesh Bhuiyan @ Golu @ Umesh @ Golu BhuiyanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- PARTHA SARTHY
Holding
The Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, subject to conditions, due to the undue delay and lack of prosecutorial progress.
Summary
The petitioner, Ramesh Bhuiyan, was arrested on 27 November 2020 in connection with a murder and related offences under several sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Witch (Dain) Practices Act. He has remained in custody for over five years, during which the trial court has neither examined any of the ten charge‑sheeted witnesses nor progressed the case despite charge‑framing on 28 July 2025. The petitioner applied for regular bail, contending that he has been falsely implicated and that the prolonged detention violates his right to a speedy trial. The State opposed the bail, but the High Court noted the lack of prosecutorial activity and the excessive delay. Consequently, the Court ordered that bail be granted on a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of personal appearance and cooperation. The bail may be cancelled if the petitioner fails to appear or is deemed to be causing further delay.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted in a case involving murder and other serious offences given the prolonged pre‑trial detention.
- Whether the failure of the prosecution to examine witnesses and progress the trial justifies bail on the ground of violation of the right to a speedy trial.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 302, 323, 341, 427, 448
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- speedy trial
- Indian Penal Code
- Prevention of Witch Practices Act
- criminal procedure
- court delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10633 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-14 Year-2020 Thana- LUTUA District- Gaya
======================================================
Ramesh Bhuiyan @ Golu @ Umesh @ Golu Bhuiyan S/o Late Badan Manjhi
@ Late Badhan Bhuiyan R/o Vill- Shankarpur, P.S.- Lutua, Dist- Gayaji
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Javed Jafar Khan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY
ORAL ORDER
3 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of
regular bail in connection with Sessions Trial no.1083 of 2023,
1595 of 2023 arising out of Lutua P.S. Case no.14 of 2020
registered under sections 302, 147, 148, 149, 323, 341, 448 and
427 of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 4 of Prevention
of Witch (Dain) Practices Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the informant states
that the nine named accused persons including the petitioner
herein came variously armed and brutally assaulted the husband
of the informant. It is further stated that the petitioner assaulted
the informant’s husband with a khanti on his head leading to his
death on the spot.
4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10633 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
inspite of the petitioner having remained in custody since
27.11.2020 i.e. for more than 5 years, there is no progress
whatsoever in the trial in the learned trial Court and not a single
witness has been examined on behalf of the prosecution. The
petitioner has a good case on merits and has been falsely
implicated in the case. He undertakes to abide by any conditions
which may be laid by this Court for his release on bail.
5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
for the State.
6. A report with respect to stage of the trial was called
for from the learned trial Court. As per the report received
contained in letter dated 20.2.2026, charge was framed against
the petitioner and others on 28.7.2025. The report further states
that there are ten charge-sheeted witnesses and inspite of
issuance of summons and bailable warrants against the
witnesses, not a single witness has been examined on behalf of
the prosecution.
7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
taking into consideration the allegations in the FIR, the
petitioner having remained in custody for more than five years
since 27.11.2020 and the contents of the report received from
the learned trial Court from which it transpires that inspite of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10633 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
issuance of summons and bailable warrants, not a single witness
has been examined on behalf of the prosecution though charge
was framed more than six months back on 28.7.2025, in the
facts of the case, the Court directs the petitioner to be enlarged on
bail in connection with Sessions Trial no.1083 of 2023, 1595 of 2023
arising out of Lutua P.S. Case no.14 of 2020 on furnishing bail bond
of Rs.10,000/ (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like
amount each to the satisfaction of the learned District and
Additional Sessions Judge, Sherghati, Gaya on the following
conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall remain physically present in
Court on each date of the trial and shall cooperate in the trial.
(ii) In case the petitioner is absent on any single date
for reasons not to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court or
the learned trial Court is of the opinion that the trial is being
delayed due to non-cooperation on part of the petitioner, the
learned trial Court may cancel the bail bond of the petitioner
and take him into custody till conclusion of the trial.
(Partha Sarthy, J)
sauravkrsinha/-
U T
Checking your session…