Patna High Court
Sanjiv SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted, as continued detention would serve no purpose other than punitive pre‑trial incarceration and would contravene Article 21.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjiv Singh, was arrested on 22 October 2024 and charged under Sections 103(1), 238, 61 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. An earlier application for regular bail was rejected, with the court allowing a fresh prayer after six months. The petitioner argued that the case had not yet been committed to trial, that he had been in custody for over a year, and that continued detention violated his Article 21 right to liberty. The State opposed the bail. The court noted that the case had been committed to the Sessions Court on 16 April 2026 and that further pre‑trial detention would be punitive and contrary to the spirit of Article 21, and therefore granted bail subject to strict conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences and the stage of the proceedings
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 238, 3(5), 61
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- right to liberty
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22355 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-380 Year-2024 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Sanjiv Singh S/o Baijnath Singh @ Baidhanath Singh R/o Village - Harka, P.S
- Minapur, District – Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhananjai Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Surendra Prasad Singh, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 15-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Kanti P.S. Case No. 380 of 2024, instituted for the offence under
Sections 103(1), 238, 61 and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023.
3. Earlier, vide order dated 15.07.2025 passed in
Cr. Misc. No. 20699 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the nature and gravity of the
offence with a liberty to renew the prayer after six months if the
trial is not concluded.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22355 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
2/4
the petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case is
framed and till date, commitment of the case has not been done.
It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the
petitioner is in custody since 22.10.2024. 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.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. In compliance of the order dated 03.04.2026, a
report dated 18.04.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that case record is fixed for commitment and this case
has been committed to the Court of Sessions on 16.04.2026.
7. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22355 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
3/4
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.
8. 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 Kanti P.S.
Case No. 380 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner’s own or
close member.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two
consecutive dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of trial.
(IV) The Petitioner shall not commit offence of a
similar nature in future.
(V) The Petitioner shall not leave the territorial
jurisdiction of the learned court below without prior permission
of the court concerned.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22355 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
4/4
conditions, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail
bonds of the petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.