Patna High Court

Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 18 March 2026
Disposal: BAIL GRANTED
Bench: R P MISHRA

Holding

The court granted bail, holding that continued pre‑trial detention would serve no purpose and infringes the spirit of Article 21.

Summary

Vikash Kumar applied for regular bail in a case registered under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He had been in judicial custody since 18 November 2024 and his earlier bail plea was rejected. The petitioner argued that his continued detention, despite charge framing and witness examination, violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The State opposed the bail. The court observed that prolonged pre‑trial detention serves no purpose and is antithetical to Article 21, and therefore granted bail on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties. The petition was disposed with the bail order.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioner’s continued pre‑trial detention violates Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Whether bail should be granted in a case where charge has been framed and witnesses examined under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

Legislation cited

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 309(4)

Subjects

bail
pre‑trial detention
Article 21
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
criminal procedure
fundamental rights

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                                CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17337 of 2026
                     Arising Out of PS. Case No.-234 Year-2024 Thana- DUMARIAGHAT District- East
                                                       Champaran
                 ======================================================
                 Vikash Kumar Son of Shubhnarayan Kunwar @ Shubhnarayan Kuwar
                 Resident of Village- Narkatiya, Bara Chakia, Parsauni Khem, P.S.- Chakia,
                 District- East Champaran
                                                                            ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                     ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Suraj Kumar Tiwari, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Pawan Kumar Chaurasia, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   18-03-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                           2.      The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Dumariaghat P.S. Case No. 234 of 2024, instituted for the

                   offences under Section 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

                   12.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 22462 of 2025 taking into

                   consideration the nature and gravity of the offence.

                           4.      Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 18.11.2024
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17337 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
                                            2/3




          without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal

          antecedent. It is also submitted that earlier, liberty was granted

          to the petitioner to renew his prayer for grant of bail before the

          Trial Court if the trial is not concluded within a period of six

          months, but charge has already been framed against the

          petitioner on 08.04.2025 and all the witnesses have 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, the period of custody undergone by the petitioner as

          also charge has been framed against 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.
             Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17337 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
                                                         3/3




                                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 Dumariaghat P.S.

                       Case No. 234 of 2024.

                                8. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.



                                                                   (Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-

U       T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…