Patna High Court
Md. Najam @ Md. NazamversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and violative of Article 21, and therefore granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Md. Najam, was arrested in May 2023 in connection with a case under IPC Sections 304(B) and 328/34. After two earlier refusals of regular bail, he filed a third bail application, arguing that the trial had not concluded and his continued detention violated his Article 21 right to liberty. The State opposed the bail. The court examined the prolonged pre‑trial custody and the lack of any imminent trial conclusion, finding that further detention would be punitive and contrary to the spirit of Article 21. Consequently, the court granted bail on the condition of a Rs.15,000 bond with two sureties and compliance with attendance requirements. The bail order was subject to cancellation if the petitioner defaults on two consecutive appearances.
Issues considered
- Does continued pre‑trial detention of the accused violate Article 21 of the Constitution?
- Should bail be granted in a case involving serious offences under IPC Sections 304(B) and 328/34 given the delay in trial?
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 21
- Indian Penal Code — s. 304(B), 328, 34
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- IPC 304(B)
- IPC 328
- criminal procedure
- right to liberty
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.10774 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2023 Thana- PIRPAINTI District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Md. Najam @ Md. Nazam Son of Md. Khalil @ Sekh Khalil Resident of
Village- Pirpainti Bazar, P.S.- Pirpainti, District- Bhagalpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Satyendra Prasad, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Pirpainti P.S. Case No. 156 of 2023, instituted for the offence
under Sections 304(B) and 328/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Earlier, on two occasions, vide order dated
20.07.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 23929 and vide order dated
14.11.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 64425 of
2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court
considering the material available on the record, with a liberty
to renew the prayer after one month, if the trial is not concluded.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the present one is the third attempt for grant of regular bail to
the petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case is
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10774 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
framed and till date trial has not been concluded. It has been
submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in
custody since 15.05.2023. 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 petitioner 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 petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances of the case, period of custody of the petitioner
and taking into account the fact that continued detention of the
petitioner 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 grant bail to
the petitioner.
7. Let the petitioner 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 Pirpainti P.S.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.10774 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
Case No. 156 of 2023, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of
the family of the petitioner.
(II) The petitioner 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 petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…