Patna High Court
Nikesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that continued detention serves no purpose and infringes Article 21, and therefore granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Nikesh Kumar was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. An earlier application for regular bail was rejected, but the petitioner filed a second bail application, arguing that only two of eight prosecution witnesses had been examined and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, amounting to a violation of his Article 21 right to liberty. The State opposed the bail. The court noted a report indicating that the trial could be completed within six months and that continued detention would be punitive and contrary to the spirit of Article 21. Consequently, the court granted bail on a cash bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and non‑intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Does continued pre‑trial detention of the petitioner violate the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India?
- Should bail be granted in view of the nature of the offences, the stage of the trial, and the likelihood of a speedy conclusion?
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11964 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-453 Year-2024 Thana- SINGHESHWAR District- Madhepura
======================================================
Nikesh Kumar S/o Deep Narayan Rajbhar @ Deep Narayan Mandal R/O
Vill.- Nishiharpur, Ward No. 01, P.S.- Shankarpur, District- Madhepura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pooja Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Choubey Jawahar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 18-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
S.T. No. 273 of 2025, arising out of Singheshwar P.S. Case No.
453 of 2024, instituted for the offence under Sections 103(1),
3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the
Arms Act.
3. Earlier vide order dated 08.08.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 38160 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the nature of accusation and
the gravity.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the present one is the second 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.11964 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
2/3
framed and till date, only two witnesses have been examined in
this case. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that
the petitioner is in custody since 07.02.2025. 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. In compliance of the order dated 23.02.2026, a
report dated 26.02.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that out of eight witnesses, two prosecution witnesses
have been examined in this case. It is further reported that the
trial would be concluded within six months.
7. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11964 of 2026(3) dt.18-03-2026
3/3
the Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to
the petitioner.
8. 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 S.T. No. 273
of 2025, arising out of Singheshwar P.S. Case No. 453 of 2024,
subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner’s own or
close member.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two
consecutive dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of trial.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,
the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…