Patna High Court
Shiv Kant Sharma @ Shivakant Sharma @ Shivkant SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail was denied as there was no new ground and the trial was already at an advanced stage.
Summary
Shiv Kant Sharma was charged under Section 64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 for alleged rape, with a victim's statement recorded under Section 183. He applied for regular bail for the second time after his earlier bail petition was rejected. The petitioner argued that he had been in judicial custody since September 2024 and that the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, as only six of eight prosecution witnesses had been examined. The State opposed the bail, noting the seriousness of the offence and that the trial was already at an advanced stage. The court found no new ground to revisit the earlier decision and therefore denied bail, directing the lower court to expedite the trial within two months and allowing the petitioner to re‑apply thereafter.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused of rape when the trial is at an advanced stage.
- Whether any new ground exists to revisit a previously rejected bail petition.
- Whether the delay in trial justifies the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 183, 64(2)(m)
Subjects
- bail
- rape
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 64(2)(m)
- Section 183
- trial delay
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22699 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-192 Year-2024 Thana- KHIRI MORE District- Patna
======================================================
Shiv Kant Sharma @ Shivakant Sharma @ Shivkant Sharma Son of Late
Laldeo Sharma @ Lal Deo Sharma R/o Village - Mungila, P.S. - Khirimore,
District - Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Rinku Devi W/o Ram Raj Singh R/o Village - Mungila, Imamganj, P.S. -
Khirimore, Dist. - Patna.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhukar Anand, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Binod Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 01-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Sessions Trial No. 1537 of 2024, arising out of Khirimore P.S.
Case No. 192 of 2024 instituted for the offences under Section
64(2)(m) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
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 on merit by this Court vide order
dated 06.05.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 5850 of 2025, taking
into account the fact that there being direct allegation of rape
against the petitioner, which is duly corroborated by the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22699 of 2026(3) dt.01-05-2026
2/3
statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of the
BNSS, 2023.
4. In compliance of the order dated 03.04.2026, a
report dated 17.04.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that six out of eight prosecution witnesses have been
examined in this case.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.09.2024
without any rhymes or reason. Learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being
concluded in the near future, hence, petitioner may be enlarged
on bail.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
grant of bail.
7. There is no new ground to consider the bail petition
of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the
trial is going on and is at an advance stage.
8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously
preferably within a period of two months from today. If the trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22699 of 2026(3) dt.01-05-2026
3/3
is not concluded within the period of two months, as stated
above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before
the court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.