Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Surendra RaiversusThe State of Bihar

Decided
Disposal
BAIL GRANTED

Holding

The Court granted bail to the petitioner subject to bond and surety conditions.

Summary

Surendra Rai was arrested on 29-08-2023 in connection with a case under Sections 304B, 201 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner sought regular bail, arguing that the trial had not concluded, ten of eleven witnesses had been examined, and continued detention violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21. The State opposed the bail. The High Court noted that prolonged pre‑trial incarceration served no purpose other than punitive detention and was contrary to the spirit of Article 21. Consequently, the Court granted bail on a bond of Rs.15,000 with two sureties, imposing conditions that a family member be a bailor and that the petitioner appear at every trial date.

Issues considered

  • Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences under Sections 304B, 201 and 34 IPC.
  • Whether continued pre‑trial detention infringes the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
  • Whether the progress of the trial justifies the grant of bail.

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • bail
  • pre‑trial detention
  • Article 21
  • IPC
  • dowry death
  • criminal procedure
  • surety

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.78543 of 2025
                 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-7 Year-2023 Thana- TARIYANI CHAPRA PS District- Sheohar
                 ======================================================
                 Surendra Rai Son of Nantun @ Sri Nantun Rai R/o Village - Kumhrar, P.S. -
                 Tariyani Chapra, District - Sheohar.

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                       Versus
                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :       Mr. Rajesh Ranjan, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :       Mr. Anish Chandra, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
                 MISHRA
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   09-01-2026              Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP

                   for the State.

                            2.      The petitioner seeks bail in connection with

                   Tariyani Chhapra P.S. Case No. 07 of 2023 instituted for the

                   offence under Sections 304B, 201 & 34 of the Indian Penal.

                   Earlier vide order dated 21-02-2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No.

                   67432 of 2024, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this

                   Court.

                            3.      Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

                   present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the

                   petitioner. It is mainly submitted that trial has not concluded till

                   date. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the

                   petitioner is in custody since 29-08-2023. Learned counsel
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78543 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026
                                            2/3




          Tariyani Chhapra P.S. Case No. 07 of 2023 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.

                  4.      Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently

          opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

                  5.      Earlier vide order dated 14.11.2025, a report was

          called for from the court below and vide report dated

          20.11.2025, it is reported that ten out of eleven witnesses have

          been examined in this case.

                  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.

                  7.      Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing

          bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties
           Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.78543 of 2025(3) dt.09-01-2026
                                                       3/3




                     of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court

                     below/concerned Court in connection with Tariyani Chhapra

                     P.S. Case No. 07 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)

Raj Kishore/-
U      T


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.