Patna High Court
Rajesh Prasad @ Rajesh Kumar @ RaviversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The bail petition was denied as there were no new grounds and the trial is still in progress.
Summary
The petitioner, Rajesh Prasad, was arrested in February 2025 and charged under multiple statutes including the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, POCSO Act, JJ Act, I.T. Act and the Bounded Labour System Act. He applied for regular bail for the second time after an earlier bail denial, arguing that he has no prior criminal record and that the trial is delayed, with only two of nineteen prosecution witnesses examined. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences. The court noted that the charge has been framed, the trial is ongoing and is expected to conclude within nine months, and that no new ground for bail was presented. Consequently, the court rejected the bail petition, directing the lower court to expedite the trial and allowing the petitioner to reapply if the trial is not concluded within five months.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the ongoing trial and lack of new grounds.
- Whether the delay in trial proceedings justifies the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 143(1), 145, 3(5), 64, 65(1), 98
- Bounded Labour System Act — s. 16, 17, 18
- Income Tax (I.T.) Act — s. 3, 4, 5, 6
- Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act — s. 75, 79
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act — s. 12, 6, 8
Subjects
- bail
- judicial custody
- trial delay
- multiple offences
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7621 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2025 Thana- MAHILA P.S District- West Champaran
======================================================
Rajesh Prasad @ Rajesh Kumar @ Ravi S/O Rameshwar Prasad R/O Village
- Ahawar Shekh Tiwari Tola, P.S- Majhauliya, District- West
Champaran,Bihar
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. X W/O Girish Prasad The officer-in- Charge, Bettiah Mhila, P.S- Bettiah
Town, Dist- West Champaran,Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mayank Mohan, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 15-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. Learned APP for the State has already informed the
Opposite Party No. 2 regarding filing of the present case.
3. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bettiah
Mahila P.S. Case No. 08 of 2025, instituted for the offences
under Sections 64, 65(1), 143(1), 145, 98, 3(5) of the Bharatiya
Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 6, 8, 12 of POCSO
Act, Sections 75, 79 of J.J. Act, Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of I.T. Act,
Sections 16, 17 and 18 of the Bounded Labour System Act.
4. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7621 of 2026(5) dt.15-05-2026
2/3
which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
05.08.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30142 of 2025 taking into
consideration the nature of accusation, gravity of the offence.
5. In compliance of the order dated 02.02.2026, a
report dated 12.02.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that charge has been framed against the petitioner and
out of nineteen prosecution witnesses, only two witnesses have
been examined in this case. It is further reported that the trial is
likely to be concluded within a period of nine months.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 23.02.2025
without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal
antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there
is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near future,
hence, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
7. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
8. There is no new ground to consider the bail petition
of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the
trial is going on.
9. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7621 of 2026(5) dt.15-05-2026
3/3
petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial and conclude the same. If the trial is not
concluded within the period of five months, 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…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.