Patna High Court
Lalan Singh @ Lala @ Lalan Kumar SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The bail petition was dismissed as no new ground was raised, and the trial was directed to be expedited.
Summary
Lalan Singh was arrested in connection with a case under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. He applied for regular bail for the second time, having been in judicial custody since 24 September 2024 after his earlier bail plea was rejected. The petitioner argued that the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, while the State and the informant contended that only two witnesses remained and the trial was near its end. The Court observed that no new material or ground was presented to revisit the earlier decision and therefore rejected the bail application. It directed the trial court to expedite the trial and complete it within three months, permitting a fresh bail application if the trial is not concluded within that period.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail on the ground that the trial is not likely to conclude soon.
- Whether the presence of two remaining witnesses indicates that the trial is on the verge of conclusion, justifying denial of bail.
- Whether a second bail application can be entertained when no new ground is raised.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- trial expeditious
- repeat bail application
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4429 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-83 Year-2024 Thana- KAJRA District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
Lalan Singh @ Lala @ Lalan Kumar Singh S/o- Kapildev Singh @ Kapildeo
Prasad Singh R/v- Pokhrama, Pokhra Wan Ps- Kajra Dist- Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Hansraj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Umeshanand Pandit, APP
For the Informant : Mr. Shashi Saurabh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State as also learned counsel for the informant.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kajra
P.S. Case No. 83 of 2024 instituted for the offences under
Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected on merit by this Court vide order
dated 08.05.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. no. 7469 of 2025, taking
into account the ample material against the petitioner supported
by the medical evidence as also the nature and gravity of the
offence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.4429 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/2
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.09.2024
without any rhymes or reason, having one criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the petitioner mainly submits that there is
no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future,
hence, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
6. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for
the Informant opposes the prayer for grant of bail. Learned
counsel for the informant submits that only two witnesses are
yet to be examined and trial is on the verge of its conclusion,
hence, petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.
7. There is no new ground to consider the bail petition
of the petitioner, which is already decided by this Court on
merit.
8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously
preferably within a period of three months from today. If the
trial is not concluded within the period of three months, as
stated above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer
before the court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…