Patna High Court

Umesh YadavversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 3 April 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

The Court rejected the petition for regular bail.

Summary

Umesh Yadav was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 147, 149, 341, 324, 323, 325, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He applied for regular bail before the Patna High Court, having been in custody since 24 December 2021 and having faced three prior bail rejections and one withdrawal. The State opposed bail, noting that the investigation under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code was complete and the trial was scheduled for examination of defence witnesses, which the accused must produce. The Court observed that the trial had not yet concluded and that the defence witness was to be produced by the accused, finding no sufficient ground to grant bail. Consequently, the Court rejected the bail application and directed the trial court to expedite the trial within three months. The order also instructed the trial court to record any delay by the accused in producing the defence witness.

Issues considered

Whether regular bail should be granted to the accused given the pending trial and the nature of the offences.
Whether the completion of the investigation under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and the pending examination of defence witnesses preclude bail.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 313
Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 149, 302, 307, 323, 324, 325, 341

Subjects

regular bail
Indian Penal Code
Criminal Procedure Code
trial delay
defence witness
Section 313
bail rejection

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14917 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-167 Year-2021 Thana- JAMOBAZAR District- Siwan
                 ======================================================
                 Umesh Yadav Son of Ramchandra Yadav Resident of Village - Ramu Rai Ke
                 Tola, P.S.- Jamo Bazar, District - Siwan.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Raghav Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   03-04-2026                           Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and

                   Learned A.P.P. for the State.

                                2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with

                   Sessions Trial No. 466 of 2022, arising out of Jamo Bazar P.S.

                   Case No. 167 of 2021, dated 03.12.2021, registered under

                   Sections 147, 149, 341, 324, 323, 325, 307 and 302 of the

                   Indian Penal Code, pending before the Court of the Additional

                   Sessions Judge-IX, Siwan.

                                3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   bail application of the petitioner has earlier been rejected three

                   times and withdrawn one time vide order dated 06.09.2022

                   passed in Cr. Misc. No. 25630 of 2022, vide order dated

                   29.03.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 65933 of 2022, vide order

                   dated 19.04.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 12466 of 2024 and
         Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14917 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
                                                     2/2




                   vide order dated 19.12.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 86808 of

                   2025. Counsel also submits that the Trial Court has not

                   concluded the trial till date and the petitioner has been in

                   custody since 24.12.2021.

                                4. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

                   bail and submits that a report has been called for, and from the

                   same, it transpires that the provisions of Section 313 Cr.P.C.

                   have been completed, and the case is presently fixed for the

                   examination of defence witnesses.

                                5. The defence witness is required to be produced by

                   the accused himself.

                                6. In the present facts and circumstances, this Court is

                   not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the

                   prayer for regular bail is hereby rejected.

                                7. It is hereby directed to the concerned Trial Court to

                   conclude the trial at the earliest, preferably within three months.

                   If any delay occurs on the part of the accused in producing the

                   defence witness, the Trial Court shall record the same in the

                   order sheet.


                                                                        (Dr. Anshuman, J.)

Aman Kumar/-
U

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…