Patna High Court
Vikash KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that bail must be granted as continued detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21.
Summary
Vikash Kumar was arrested in September 2024 for offences under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. An earlier application for regular bail was rejected, but the petitioner remained in custody for over a year. Counsel argued that the trial was still at the appearance stage, with seven witnesses yet to be examined and an estimated six‑month completion time, making continued detention violative of Article 21. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the allegations. The High Court noted that prolonged pre‑trial detention served only a punitive purpose and was contrary to the spirit of Article 21, and therefore granted bail subject to monetary and conduct conditions. The order directed the petitioner to appear at each trial date, refrain from tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, and provided for bail bond and sureties.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
- Whether the stage of trial and expected duration justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 3(5), 80(2)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- right to liberty
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26047 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-614 Year-2024 Thana- FATUA District- Patna
======================================================
Vikash Kumar S/o Arvind Ray R/o Village - Vikrampur, P.S. - Fatuha, Distt. -
Patna.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Jay Ram Prasad, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar 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 S.Tr.
No. 2444 of 2025, arising out of Fatuha P.S. Case No. 614 of
2024, instituted for the offence under Sections 80(2) and 3(5) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Earlier, vide order dated 23.09.2025 passed in
Cr. Misc. No. 57603 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the nature of allegation and
gravity of the offence with a direction to the learned Court
below to expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to
the petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge has not been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26047 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
framed in this case. It has been submitted on behalf of the
petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 19.09.2024.
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 17.04.2026 a
report dated 06.05.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that the present stage of the trial is on appearance.
Seven witnesses are to be examined. The expected time of
concluding the trial is approximately six months after
conclusion of deposition.
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.26047 of 2026(3) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
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 Fatuha P.S.
Case No. 614 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.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid 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.