Patna High Court
Rohit Kumar Singh @ Rohit KumarversusThe state of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner’s continued pre‑trial detention was unjustified and violative of Article 21, and consequently granted bail.
Summary
Rohit Kumar Singh was arrested in connection with a case registered under Section 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, with Sections 317(3) and 317(5) later added. He has been in judicial custody since 25 July 2024 without charge framing or trial progress, and his earlier bail application was rejected. The petitioner argued that the prolonged pre‑trial detention violated his fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The State opposed bail. The Court observed that continued detention served no purpose other than punitive pre‑trial incarceration and was antithetical to Article 21, and therefore granted bail subject to monetary surety and conditions of appearance.
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 charges under Sections 310(2), 317(3) and 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 have been framed but trial has not progressed.
- Whether the lack of charge framing and trial delay justifies the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 310(2), 317(3), 317(5)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- right to liberty
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18665 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-170 Year-2024 Thana- SOHSARAI District- Nalanda
======================================================
Rohit Kumar Singh @ Rohit Kumar S/O Ram Kumar Singh R/O Vill.- Naya
Tola (Madhopur) , P.S- Bakhtiyarpur, Dist- Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The state of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Raj Kishor Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, 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
Sohsarai P.S. Case No. 170 of 2024, instituted for the offences
under Section 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023,
later on Sections 317(3) and 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023 were added.
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
29.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 33899 of 2025 taking into
consideration the recovery from petitioner’s possession and the
petitioner being identified in the T.I. Parade.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18665 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 25.07.2024
without any rhymes or reason and has got four criminal
antecedents. It is also submitted that earlier, the petitioner was
granted liberty to renew his prayer for bail if the trial is not
concluded within a period of six months but there is no any
progress of the trial and charge has not been framed against the
petitioner. 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 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18665 of 2026(2) dt.18-03-2026
3/3
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 Sohsarai P.S. Case
No. 170 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…