Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Suresh BaithaversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
ALLOWED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner with the condition of physical presence at every court date and a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties.

Summary

The petitioner, Suresh Baitha, was charged in Vijaypur P.S. Case No. 124 of 2017 for offences under Sections 272, 273, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 30(a), 37(b) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act. His earlier bail was cancelled on the ground that he had jumped bail, and he contended that subsequent court processes were not served to him and that his absence had not hampered court proceedings. The State opposed the bail application, arguing that the cancellation was justified. After hearing both sides, the Court held that bail could be granted provided the petitioner remains physically present on every date fixed by the trial court. Accordingly, the petitioner was ordered to furnish a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the same amount, subject to the conditions imposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner despite the earlier cancellation of his bail on the ground of jumping bail
  • Whether the alleged non‑service of court processes and the claim of no hindrance to court work justify granting bail

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • IPC
  • Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
  • jumping bail
  • court procedure
  • criminal law

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20766 of 2026
                    Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2017 Thana- VIJAYEPUR District- Gopalganj
                 ======================================================
                 Suresh Baitha Son of Late Bijai Baitha Resident of Village - Bhanpur, P.S. -
                 Vijaypur, Dist. - Gopalganj.
                                                                             ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                      ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Amish Kumar, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mrs. Indu Kumari Srivastava, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                       ORAL ORDER
2   02-04-2026                  Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

                   learned APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with

                   Vijaypur P.S. Case No. 124 of 2017 registered for the offence

                   punishable under Sections 272, 273, 420 of the Indian Penal Code

                   and Sections 30(a), 37(b) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.

                                3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that

                   in this case, the petitioner was on bail and his bail bond was

                   cancelled as he had jumped the privilege of bail. He also submits

                   that the case was fixed for appearance and he could not appear

                   and the processes issued by the court, were not served on him. He

                   further submits that due to his absence, no work of the court has

                   been hampered, as the case was pending for appearance. It is a

                   simple case of misuse of bail.

                                4. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20766 of 2026(2) dt.02-04-2026
                                                       2/2




                     for the State.

                                  5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

                     considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is

                     inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail with the condition that

                     the petitioner shall remain physically present on each and

                     every date fixed by the learned trial court till the conclusion of

                     the trial. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged

                     on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand

                     only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction

                     of the learned District & Additional Sessions Judge-IV-cum-

                     Exclusive Special Excise Court-II, Gopalganj in connection with

                     Vijaypur P.S. Case No. 124 of 2017.

                                  6. Before parting, it is very disheartening to note that

                     even the officers in the cadre of A.D.J. are not able to understand

                     their jurisdiction and the orders are passed in a mechanical

                     manner without application of mind, if the case was fixed for

                     appearance, other accused persons were also not present, so how

                     has the work of the court been hampered if the present petitioner

                     is not present, he should introspect.


                                                    (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J)
Sudhanshu/-

U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.