Patna High Court
Sukhdeo Mandal @ Sugdeo Mndal @ Sukhdev Mandal @ Sugdev MandalversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The application for regular bail was dismissed, and the petitioner was not granted bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Sukhdeo Mandal, was charged under Sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code for a murder case registered in 2001. He applied for regular bail, claiming that six of nine witnesses had already been examined in the trial. The court noted that the petitioner had surrendered in December 2024 and was considered an absconder. Relying on the gravity of the offence, the progress of the trial, and the Supreme Court’s decision in X vs. State of Rajasthan (2024), the judge refused to revisit the earlier bail denial. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed and the trial court was directed to expedite the proceedings.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused of murder who is deemed an absconder despite partial trial progress
- Whether the Supreme Court precedent in X vs. State of Rajasthan (2024) mandates denial of bail in such circumstances
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- murder
- IPC 302
- absconding
- trial acceleration
- Supreme Court precedent
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1823 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-48 Year-2001 Thana- SONO District- Jamui
======================================================
Sukhdeo Mandal @ Sugdeo Mndal @ Sukhdev Mandal @ Sugdev Mandal
S/O Late Khurughdhari Mandal @ Murari Mandal R/O Village- Gadi, P.S-
Chakai (Chihra), Distt.- Jamui.
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rana Hason, Advocate
For the Opposite Party : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 12-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of regular bail in connection with Sono P.S.
Case No.48 of 2001 registered for the offence under sections
302/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner
was rejected by this Court vide orders dated 12.05.2025 passed
in Criminal Miscellaneous No.17752 of 2025. The aforesaid
order dated 12.05.2025 reads as under:-
“Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in
connection with Sono (Charkapathar) P.S.
Case No. 48 of 2001 registered for the offence
under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1823 of 2026(2) dt.12-02-2026
2/2
Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, the
petitioner is named in the FIR as a suspect.
4. The petitioner has surrendered on
13.12.2024 in a case registered in the year
2001 and he appears to be an absconder.
5. Considering the fact that the
petitioner is an absconder, this Court is not
inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
6.Accordingly, this application is
dismissed.”
4. It has been submitted by learned counsel for
the petitioners that out of nine witnesses, six witnesses have
been examined in the trial.
5. Considering the gravity of offence and fact
that the trial is proceeding and also the law laid down down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of X vs. State of
Rajasthan & Anr. reported as 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539, I am
not inclined to review my earlier order. Accordingly, this bail
application is dismissed.
6. The trial court is directed to expedite the trial
and conclude the same at the earliest.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
pawan/-
U
Checking your session…