Patna High Court
Randheer Kumar @ Randhir KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and violative of Article 21, and therefore bail must be granted subject to conditions.
Summary
Randheer Kumar was arrested in connection with offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. He has been in judicial custody since 10 February 2025 and his charge was framed on 23 February 2026, with no witnesses examined. The petitioner sought regular bail for the second time after an earlier denial, arguing that continued detention violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The court found that the prolonged pre‑trial detention served no purpose other than punitive incarceration and infringed Article 21, and therefore granted bail on a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties and specific conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the nature of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- high court
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23429 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-982 Year-2024 Thana- DANAPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Randheer Kumar @ Randhir Kumar S/o Late Krishna Kant Singh @ Late
Krishan Kant Singh R/o Danara, P.S- Bikram, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Patanjali Rishi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-04-2026 Heard Mr. Patanjali Rishi, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Danapur P.S. Case No. 982 of 2024, instituted for the offences
under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and read with Section 27 of the Arms Act.
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
12.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 33909 of 2025 taking into
consideration the nature and gravity of the offence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 10.02.2025
without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23429 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
antecedent. It is submitted that previously the petitioner was
granted liberty to renew his prayer for bail before the learned
Court below if the trial is not concluded within a period of six
weeks. It is next submitted that charge has already been framed
against the petitioner on 23.02.2026 and no any witnesses have
been examined in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner
further 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
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand) with two
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23429 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Danapur P.S. Case
No. 982 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…