Patna High Court
Nitish KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, subject to a cash bond and surety conditions, finding that continued detention would violate his constitutional right to liberty.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitish Kumar, applied for regular bail in a case under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, arising from a 2024 police case. An earlier bail application was rejected on 16 September 2025, with the court allowing a fresh application after six months. The petitioner argued that he had been in custody since 26 April 2025, that the charge was only framed on 29 January 2026, no witnesses had been examined, and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, violating his Article 21 right to liberty. The State opposed the bail. Considering the prolonged detention, lack of trial progress, and constitutional concerns, the court granted bail subject to a cash bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and conditions of appearance.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offence under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether prolonged pre‑trial detention without trial conclusion violates the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court are sufficient to ensure the petitioner’s attendance at trial.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 309(4)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- right to liberty
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Section 309(4)
- criminal procedure
- court conditions
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32301 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2024 Thana- HALSI District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Nitish Kumar S/O Rajesh Yadav R/O Village- Lalganj, PS -Chewara, Distt-
Sheikhpura
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Brajesh Sahay, Advocate
Ms. Harshita, Advocate
Ms. Mandavi Kumari, Advocate
Ms. Aadya Dipti, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Madhuri Lata, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 08-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S. T.
No. 2 of 2026 arising out of Halsi P.S. Case No. 303 of 2024
instituted for the offence under Section 309(4) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Earlier, vide order dated 16.09.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 44572 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the nature of allegation,
gravity of offence and materials available in the case diary with
a liberty to renew the prayer after six months if the trial was not
concluded.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32301 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier,
vide order dated 16.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 44572 of
2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court
with liberty to the petitioner to renew the prayer for grant of bail
after six months. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
in light of the said observation, the petitioner has preferred the
second regular bail application. It is mainly submitted that
charge has been framed in this case on 29.01.2026 but no any
witness has been examined. It has been submitted on behalf of
the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 26.04.2025.
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. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case as also the period of custody of the petitioner, this
Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32301 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
3/3
7. 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 S. T. No. 2 of 2026
arising out of Halsi P.S. Case No. 303 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)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.