Patna High Court

Ritesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 1 May 2026
Disposal: DISMISSED
Bench: SATYAVRAT VERMA

Holding

The court held that it will not extend the surrender period when the original deadline has passed and the modification application is filed thereafter.

Summary

The petitioner, Ritesh Kumar, had been granted provisional anticipatory bail on 5 January 2026 with a direction to surrender to the trial court within six weeks, i.e., by 16 February 2026. He failed to surrender, claiming he was suffering from Hepatocellular Jaundice and filed a modification application on 6 April 2026 seeking an extension. The State opposed, arguing the petition was a ploy and that the application was filed well after the surrender deadline, contrary to established practice. The Court reiterated its consistent view that it will not extend the surrender period when the original deadline has elapsed and no prior application for modification was made. Consequently, the Court dismissed the modification application.

Issues considered

Whether a court may extend the surrender deadline under a provisional anticipatory bail order after the original deadline has expired.
Whether the petitioner's illness justifies a belated modification application filed after the surrender deadline.

Subjects

anticipatory bail
provisional bail
surrender deadline
modification application
procedural default
illness

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29083 of 2026
                                              In
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56742 of 2025
                       Arising Out of PS. Case No.-426 Year-2024 Thana- DIGHWARA District- Saran
                 ======================================================
                 Ritesh Kumar S/O Diwakar Singh R/O Village- Mahadali Chak, P.O.-
                 Gopalpur, P.S.- Nayagaon, Distt.- Saran at Chapra.
                                                                           ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                    Versus
                 The State of Bihar
                                                                    ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Ms. Shweta Anand, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
                                       ORAL ORDER

2   01-05-2026                  1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

                   learned APP for the State, Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad.

                                2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

                   petitioner was granted the privilege of provisional anticipatory

                   bail by an order dated 05.01.2026 with a direction to surrender

                   before the learned Trial Court within a period of six weeks. It is

                   submitted that period of six weeks expired on 16.02.2026, but

                   then petitioner could not surrender, since he was suffering from

                   Hepertocellular Jaundice, as would manifest from Annexure-2

                   series to the modification application.

                                3. The learned APP for the State, Mr. Chandra

                   Bhushan       Prasad,      vehemently        opposes      the     modification

                   application and submits that it appears to be a ploy of the

                   petitioner in not surrendering before the learned Trial Court,

                   despite being granted the privilege of provisional anticipatory
            Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29083 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026
                                                        2/2




                      bail. It is submitted that last date for surrender was 16.02.2026

                      and if petitioner was suffering from any kind of disease, in that

                      event the petitioner could have moved before this Court seeking

                      extension of time on the said ground, before the time of

                      surrender expiring, but then the instant modification application

                      has been filed on 06.04.2026 i.e. after more than 45 days of the

                      time of surrender expiring, it is thus submitted that it appears

                      that the petitioner is moving at his leisure.

                                   4. The Court is taking a consistent view of not

                      extending the period of surrender in the event if the petitioner

                      has not surrendered within the time stipulated in the order by

                      which he was granted the privilege of provisional anticipatory

                      bail or has not moved the Court seeking modification of the

                      order prior to the date of surrender expiring.

                                   5. The Court is in complete agreement with the

                      submissions made by the learned APP for the State, as such, the

                      modification application is dismissed.



                                                        (Satyavrat Verma, J)
Rishabh/-

U      T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…