Patna High Court
BIPIN KUMAR @ BIPIN SINGH @ GHOGHANversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail must be granted because the extended custody and scant progress of the trial infringe the right to a speedy trial.
Summary
Bipin Kumar was charged under Sections 115(2), 127(1), 109 and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act for allegedly firing and injuring a victim. He had been in custody since 26‑10‑2024 and only two of seven witnesses had been examined at the time of his second bail application. The petitioner argued that his right to a speedy trial was being violated and relied on the Supreme Court decision in Pradeep Kumar @ Banu v. State of Punjab (SLP (Crl.) No.18775/2025). The State opposed bail. The Patna High Court, noting the prolonged detention, limited trial progress and the Supreme Court precedent, allowed the regular bail application, directing a bail bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties and imposing conditions of verification of the witness statement and regular appearance in court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences charged.
- Whether the prolonged pre‑trial detention and limited witness examination violate the petitioner’s right to a speedy trial.
- Whether the court may impose conditions such as verification of trial progress and regular appearance as part of bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109, 115(2), 127(1), 352
Subjects
- bail
- speedy trial
- pre‑trial detention
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- witness examination
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26157 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-47 Year-2024 Thana- Chakia District- Begusarai
======================================================
BIPIN KUMAR @ BIPIN SINGH @ GHOGHAN S/o Late Ramnandan
Singh R/o vill - Rupnagar, P.S.- Chakiya, Distt.- Begusarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Rakesh Mohan Singh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Nitya Nand Tiwary
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 22-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt by the petitioner for
regular bail in connection with Chakiya P.S. Case No. 47 of
2024, registered for offences under Sections 115(2), 127(1),
109, and 352 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Section
27 of the Arms Act. Earlier the prayer for bail was rejected on
14.05.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 11495 of 2025.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to
have fired and injured the victim.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence. The
petitioner is in custody since 26.10.2024. It is further submitted
that, although the petitioner has been in custody since
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26157 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
2/3
26.10.2024, only two out of seven witnesses have been
examined in the trial. He further submits that the petitioner has a
right to a speedy trial and cannot be kept in custody for an
indefinite period. He relies upon a judgment of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court passed in the case of Pradeep Kumar @ Banu
vs State of Punjab in SLP (Crl.) No. 18775/2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
the period of custody, the delay in trial and the judgment of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pradeep Kumar @ Banu
(supra), this application for regular bail is allowed.
7. Accordingly, let the petitioner, above named, be
released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten
Thousand)with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of the learned Court below where the case is
pending/successor Court in connection with Chakiya P.S. Case
No. 47 of 2024 subject to condition that:-
(i) At the time of accepting the bail
bonds, the Court below shall verify the
statement made on behalf of the petitioner,
i.e., that only two witnesses have been
examined so far in the trial. If the statement
is found to be true, only then the bail bonds
of the petitioner shall be accepted;
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26157 of 2026(2) dt.22-04-2026
3/3
otherwise, appropriate orders shall be
passed in accordance with law.
(ii) The petitioner shall appear in
the trial regularly either personally or
through his lawyer and shall cooperate in
the trial and non-cooperation in the trial
shall result in cancellation of the bail bond
of the petitioner.
8. It is made clear that any observation made herein is
prima facie in nature and limited solely for the purpose of
adjudication of the present bail application. Such observations
shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case
and shall not influence the trial or any other proceedings in any
manner.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…