Patna High Court
Mohan Singh @ Mohan Kr. SinghversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and violative of Article 21, and thus bail must be granted subject to conditions.
Summary
The petitioner, Mohan Singh, sought regular bail in a Special POCSO case (No. 258 of 2023) arising from a Mahila P.S. case involving offences under Section 376 of the IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act. An earlier bail application was rejected on 5 December 2024 due to the gravity of the offences. The petitioner argued that he had been in custody since 2 October 2023, only two witnesses remained to be examined, and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, amounting to a violation of his Article 21 right to liberty. The State opposed the bail. The court, noting the prolonged pre‑trial detention and lack of progress, held that continued incarceration would be punitive and contrary to the spirit of Article 21, and therefore granted bail with a bond of Rs. 15,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance and family surety.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences under the IPC and POCSO Act.
- Whether the prolonged pre‑trial detention violates the petitioner’s fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the limited number of remaining witnesses and delay in trial justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 376
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — s. 4, 6
Subjects
- bail
- POCSO
- rape
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- criminal procedure
- special court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.61909 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-99 Year-2023 Thana- MAHILA P.S. District- Patna
======================================================
Mohan Singh @ Mohan Kr. Singh S/o- Late Rai Bahadur Singh Resident of
Navtol Patori PS- Bihra District- Saharsa, A/P- Shiv Jyoti Apt. Flat No-308,
R.K Puram Ps- Danapur Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sudha Kumari W/o- Sanjay Kumar F.No-102, Block-A, Dream Jewel Apt.
R.K Puram Saguna, PS Danapur, Dist- Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. N.K. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Kanchan Kr Singh, Advocate
Mr. Kumar Rajdeep, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Pd., APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 09-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Special
POCSO Case No. 258 of 2023, arising out of Mahila P.S. Case
No. 99 of 2023 instituted for the offence under Sections 376 of
the IPC and 4/6 of the POCSO Act.
3. Earlier vide order dated 05.12.2024 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 70104 of 2024 regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the nature and gravity of
offence.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61909 of 2025(5) dt.09-01-2026
2/3
present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the
petitioner. It is mainly submitted that only two witnesses
including the medical officer and one independent witness are
left for examination. It has been submitted on behalf of the
petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 02.10.2023.
Learned counsel further submits that there is no likelihood of
the trial being concluded in the near future as no witness has
been examined in this case after 02.09.2025. 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 the
Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.61909 of 2025(5) dt.09-01-2026
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 Special POCSO
Case No. 258 of 2023, arising out of Mahila P.S. Case No. 99 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.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.