Patna High Court
Belson JoanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court held that the petitioner is entitled to bail, subject to conditions, as continued detention would be punitive and infringe Article 21.
Summary
The petitioner, Belson Joan, was charged under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and had been in custody since August 2024. An earlier application for regular bail was rejected, but the petitioner filed a second bail application, arguing that only two witnesses had been examined, co‑accused had been granted bail, and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, amounting to a violation of Article 21. The State opposed the bail. The Court considered the length of pre‑trial detention, the nature of the offences, and the constitutional right to liberty, and concluded that continued incarceration would be punitive and contrary to Article 21. Accordingly, the Court granted bail on a cash bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and imposed conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and non‑intimidation of witnesses. The order directs the lower court to release the petitioner subject to these conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the nature and gravity of the offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
- Whether the delay in trial proceedings and limited examination of witnesses justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- fundamental rights
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- constitutional law
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.32309 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2024 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna
======================================================
Belson Joan S/o Raj Kumar Sao R/o Village - Mahmadalichak, P.S. -
Nauabatpur, Dist. - Patna(Bihar).
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Arun Kumar Singh, A.PP
======================================================
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
Punpun P.S. Case No. 197 of 2024, instituted for the offence
under Sections 103)1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023.
3. Earlier, vide order dated 07.07.2025 passed in
Cr. Misc. No. 17290 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the nature and gravity of the
offence as alleged against the petitioner as also taking into
account the materials available on record, with directed to the
Court below to expedite the trial and conclude the same
expeditiously.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32309 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
2/3
the present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to
the petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case is
framed and till date, only two witnesses has been examined. It
has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner
is in custody since 16.08.2024. Learned counsel for the
petitioner further submitted that other co-accused persons have
been granted regular bail by this Bench on 17.02.2025 passed in
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 79594 of 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. 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
incarceration, which is antithetical to the spirit of Article 21 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32309 of 2026(2) dt.08-05-2026
3/3
the Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to
the petitioner.
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 Punpun P.S.
Case No. 197 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/Sukriti
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.