Patna High Court
Niranjan KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail must be granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, a former IT supervisor, was arrested in September 2024 in connection with a 2017 case alleging offences under IPC sections 467, 468, 406, 409, 470 and 471. He applied for regular bail; the court had earlier denied bail in July 2025, allowing a re‑application after six months. Counsel argued that only six of ten witnesses had been examined, the trial was far from conclusion, and continued detention violated Article 21. The State opposed bail citing the seriousness of the offences. Considering the prolonged custody, lack of criminal antecedent, and the principle that pre‑trial detention should not be punitive, the court granted bail with a bond of Rs 15,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted in a case involving serious offences under Sections 467, 468, 406, 409, 470 and 471 of the IPC
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution
- Whether the stage of the trial and the number of witnesses examined justify granting bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 406, 409, 467, 468, 470, 471
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Indian Penal Code
- forgery
- criminal breach of trust
- fundamental rights
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17775 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-450 Year-2017 Thana- LAKHISARAI District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Niranjan Kumar S/o Ghanshyam Verma R/o Village- Lakhna, P.O.- Gopalpur,
P.S. and Distt.- Jamui, then I.T. Supervisor, District welfare office, Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Ram Ikbal Ram S/o Late Somaru Ram R/o vill and post - Etwari, P.S.-
Sahar, Distt.- Bhojpur (ARa)
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rabi Bhushan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nityanand Tiwari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 18-03-2026 Heard Mr. Rabi Bhushan, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Nityanand Tiwari, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Kabaiya P.S. Case No. 450 of 2017 instituted for the offence
under Sections 467, 468, 406, 409, 470, 471 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. Earlier vide order dated 14.07.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 4709 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the nature and gravity of
offence with a liberty to renew the prayer after six months if the
trial is not concluded.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17775 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
2/3
present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the
petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case is
framed and till date, only six witnesses, out of ten have been
examined and four witnesses are yet to be examined. It has been
submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in
custody since 11.09.2024 and has no criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel further submits that there is no likelihood of
the trial being concluded in the near future. 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.
4. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
5. 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 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.17775 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
3/3
6. 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 Kabaiya P.S. Case
No. 450 of 2017, 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)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…