Patna High Court
Subodh RaiversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The bail application was rejected as there were no fresh grounds to disturb the earlier denial, and the trial must be expedited within six months.
Summary
The petitioner, Subodh Rai, was charged under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act for offences alleged in Bijdhari Police Station Case No. 21 of 2024. He applied for bail for the second time after an earlier bail denial, contending that he had been in judicial custody since September 2024 and that only one of eight charge‑sheeted witnesses had been examined. The State opposed bail, relying on a Supreme Court decision (X v. State of Rajasthan, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539) that courts should be reluctant to grant bail once trial in serious offences has commenced. The Patna High Court held that there were no fresh grounds to revisit the earlier decision and rejected the bail application, directing the trial court to complete the trial within six months and permitting a fresh bail petition thereafter if the deadline is missed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused of serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Arms Act after the trial has commenced and no fresh ground is shown.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- serious offences
- trial commencement
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- high court
- expeditious trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25710 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-21 Year-2024 Thana- Bijdhari District- East Champaran
======================================================
Subodh Rai S/O Late Bhagirath Rai @ Bhagrith Ray Resident of Village-
Sundrapur, P.S- Bijdhari, Distt.- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 15-05-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mrs. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Bijdhari P.S. Case No. 21 of 2024, instituted for the offences
under Sections 103(1), 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and 27 of the Arms Act.
3. Earlier, vide order dated 29.08.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 22067 of 2025 regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the nature and gravity of
offence and the material available in the case diary. The present
one is the second attempt of the petitioner for grant of bail.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly submits
that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25710 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
23.09.2024 without any rhymes or reason. Learned counsel for
the petitioner also submits that there are eight charge-sheeted
witnesses and out of them, only one witness has been examined
till date, which is evident from the report dated 22.04.2026 sent
by the learned court below.
5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
grant of bail stating that trial has commenced. Learned APP for
the State relied upon a decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court
reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 3539 (X. vs. State of
Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein in paragraph no. 14, the Hon’ble
Apex Court has held has under:
“14. Ordinarily in serious offences like
rape, murder, dacoity, etc., once the trial
commences and the prosecution starts examining
its witnesses, the Court, be it the Trial Court or the
High Court should be loath in entertaining the bail
application of the accused.”
6. There is no fresh ground to consider the bail
petition of the petitioner.
7. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25710 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
preferably within a period of six months from today. If the trial
is not concluded within the period of six months, as stated
above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before
the court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.