Patna High Court
Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Yadav @ Guddu YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that continued pre‑trial detention of the petitioner would be punitive and contrary to Article 21, and therefore bail must be granted subject to prescribed conditions.
Summary
Mukesh Kumar was arrested in connection with a case registered under Sections 365, 364, 302, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. He applied for regular bail for the third time after earlier refusals, arguing that he had been in judicial custody since May 2024 without any criminal antecedent and that the trial had examined only three witnesses. The State opposed the bail, citing the seriousness of the offences. The Court considered that prolonged pre‑trial detention served no purpose and infringed the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. Consequently, the Court granted bail on a bond of Rs 15,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions regarding family surety, appearance, non‑re‑offending and territorial restrictions. The bail order was pronounced by Justice Rudra Prakash Mishra.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of offences under IPC Sections 365, 364, 302, 201 and 120B.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120B, 201, 302, 364, 365
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Indian Penal Code
- criminal procedure
- fundamental rights
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5691 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-354 Year-2023 Thana- RAJAOLI District- Nawada
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Yadav @ Guddu Yadav S/o Damodar Yadav R/o
vill - Ghasko Tand, P.S.- Garhi, Distt.- Jamui, at present Vill - Chatkari Tola,
Tara Tand, P.s.- Rajauli, Distt.- Nawada
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Mayank Raj, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rana Randhir Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 29-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Rajauli
P.S. Case No. 354 of 2023, instituted for the offences under
Sections 365 of the Indian Penal Code and later on Sections
364, 302, 201 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code have been
added.
3. This is the third attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which were earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
20.12.2024 and 19.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. Nos. 69336 of
2024 and Cr. Misc. No. 52956 of 2025 taking into consideration
the seriousness of the case.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5691 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 23.05.2024
without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal
antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted
that the trial is in progress and only three witnesses have been
examined in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner next
submits 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 reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court
in plethora of Judgments.
5. Learned APP 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, the period of custody undergone by 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
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5691 of 2026(2) dt.29-01-2026
3/3
sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Rajauli P.S. Case No.
354 of 2023, 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.
(III) If the petitioner is found involved in similar nature
of offence in future, the Trial Court will have the liberty to
cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.
(IV) The petitioner will not leave the territorial
jurisdiction of the Court below without its prior permission for
the same.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…