Patna High Court
Suresh Yadav @ Suresh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that continued pre‑trial detention serves no purpose and violates Article 21, and consequently granted bail to the petitioner.
Summary
Suresh Yadav was arrested in June 2023 for offences under IPC sections 365, 364, 302, 201 and 120B. The trial remains pending and he has been in custody for over two years. Earlier applications for regular bail were rejected twice, but the co‑accused was later released on bail. The petitioner argued that continued pre‑trial detention violates his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The State opposed the bail on the ground of the seriousness of the charges. The High Court held that further detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21, and therefore granted bail subject to monetary and personal surety conditions and compliance with trial attendance and non‑interference directives.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences and the trial not being concluded.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention infringes the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 201, 302, 364, 365
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- IPC
- criminal procedure
- high court
- serious offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12101 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-354 Year-2023 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada
======================================================
Suresh Yadav @ Suresh Kumar Son of Late Damodar Yadav Resident of
Village- Ghasakotand, P.S.- Gadhi, District- Jamui. At present Resident of
Village- Chatkari, Tola Taratand, P.S.- Rajauli, District- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate
Mr.Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Tapeshwar Sharma, 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
S.T. No. 140 of 2024, arising out of Rajauli P.S. Case No. 354 of
2023, instituted for the offence under Sections 365 of the Indian
Penal Code, subsequently, u/s 364, 302, 201&120B of the
Indian Penal Code were also added.
3. Earlier, on two occasions, vide order dated
13.05.2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 10805 of
2024 and vide order dated 08.08.2025 passed in Criminal
Miscellaneous No. 15669 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner
was rejected by this Court considering the seriousness of the
case, with a liberty to renew the prayer after three months if the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12101 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/3
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
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 27.06.2023. Learned counsel further submits that
there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near
future. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that
other co-accused has been granted bail by this Bench vide order
dated 29.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5691 of 2026. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12101 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
3/3
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 Rajauli P.S.
Case No. 354 of 2023, 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…