Patna High Court
SalmanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that bail must be granted as continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and violative of Article 21.
Summary
Salman was arrested in connection with a case under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and has been in judicial custody since 18 November 2024. He previously applied for bail, which was denied, and now seeks regular bail, arguing that his prolonged pre‑trial detention violates Article 21 of the Constitution. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence and the recovery of looted goods. The Court considered the length of custody, the fact that only one of five witnesses had been examined, and the principle that pre‑trial detention should not become punitive. Finding that continued detention would serve no purpose other than punishment, the Court granted bail subject to a cash bond and surety conditions, and required the petitioner’s regular appearance in court.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate bail jurisprudence for an offence under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023?
- Does prolonged pre‑trial detention without trial infringe the petitioner’s right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution?
- Should the bail be denied on the ground of the nature and gravity of the alleged offence and recovery of looted goods?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 309(4)
- Constitution of India — s. Article 21
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- fundamental rights
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 309(4)
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17017 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2024 Thana- DUMARIAGHAT District- East
Champaran
======================================================
Salman S/O Ramjan @ Ramjani Resident of Village- Madapur, Bajhauda,
P.S.- Pilakhua, District- Harpur at Uttar Pardesh
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shashank Shekhar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anant Kumar 1, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Dumariyaghat P.S. Case No. 234 of 2024, instituted for the
offences under Sections 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
29.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5339 of 2025 taking into
consideration the nature and gravity of the offence as also there
being recovery of looted goods from the possession of the
accused persons including this petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17017 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.11.2024
without any rhymes or reason and has got one criminal
antecedent. It is next submitted that charge has already been
framed against the petitioner on 08.04.2025 and out of five
witnesses, only one witness has been examined in this case.
Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits 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
reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of Judgments.
5. Learned APP 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, present stage of the case, the period of custody
undergone by 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17017 of 2026(2) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Dumariyaghat P.S.
Case No. 234 of 2024, 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)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.