Patna High Court
Roushan Kumar @ Roushan Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
Holding
The High Court granted bail to the petitioner, directing his release on bail with conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Roushan Kumar Yadav, was charged under Sections 399, 402, 413, 414, 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code for alleged offences arising from a 2011 case. His earlier bail bond was cancelled on 5 November 2019 at the stage of evidence, and the trial court refused his regular bail application, citing the age of the case and the cancellation. The petitioner argued that the case was a misuse of the law and that no substantive evidence had been produced against him. The Patna High Court, after hearing counsel, found that the trial court had erred in denying bail and that the petitioner was entitled to liberty pending trial. The Court ordered his release on bail conditioned on physical presence at every court date and the furnishing of a Rs.10,000 bail bond with two sureties, to be approved by the Additional Sessions Judge. The judgment also criticised the lower court officer for apparent lack of jurisdictional understanding.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the earlier cancellation of his bail bond and the lapse of time since the offence.
- Whether the trial court erred in refusing bail on the ground of the case’s antiquity and alleged misuse of the law.
- Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to grant bail in the present circumstances.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 399, 402, 413, 414, 419, 420
Subjects
- bail
- misuse of law
- Indian Penal Code
- trial court discretion
- high court jurisdiction
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17137 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2011 Thana- ROSHANGANJ District- Gaya
======================================================
Roushan Kumar @ Roushan Kumar Yadav S/O Khiru Yadav R/O Village-
Nawada, P.S- Raushanganj, Distt.- Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vijay Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Raj Ballabh Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
2 18-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case
registered for the offence punishable under Sections 399, 402, 413,
414, 419 & 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
this is a case of misuse. It has further been submitted that bail bond
of this petitioner was cancelled on 05.11.2019. It has further been
submitted that misuse has not been made willfully rather the
petitioner has gone outside for earning his livelihood.
4. Learned trial court has rejected the bail petition of
this petitioner on the ground that “as the case is of the year 2011
and the bail bond was cancelled at the stage of evidence on
05.11.2019, so this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner
on bail.”
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17137 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
2/2
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
from the order of the learned trial court it is evident that no
evidence was present at that date.
6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and
considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is
inclined to enlarge both the petitioner on bail with the condition
that the petitioner shall remain physically present on each and
every date till the conclusion of the trial. The above named
petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with
Sessions Trial No. 561 of 2013, 920 of 2023 arising out of
Roshanganj P.S. Case No. 71 of 2011 on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount
each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge- 1 st,
Sherghati, Gaya Ji.
7. Before parting, it is very disheartening to note that an
officer in the cadre of District & Additional Session Judge is
rejecting the bail in a case of misuse. It seems that the concerned
officer is either unaware of his jurisdiction or does not know how
to use his discretion and to exercise jurisdiction. He should
introspect.
(Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
durgesh/-
U T
Checking your session…