Patna High Court
Manish Sharma @ ManishversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court granted bail to the petitioner, holding that continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21.
Summary
Manish Sharma was arrested on 10 July 2024 in connection with a case under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner had previously been denied regular bail on two occasions and sought a third bail application, arguing that only three prosecution witnesses had been examined and that the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, violating his Article 21 right to liberty. The State opposed the bail, but a trial report showed that out of seven witnesses, four had been examined and the trial was expected to finish within three months. Considering the prolonged pre‑trial detention, the nature of the offence, and the imminent conclusion of the trial, the Court found continued incarceration to be punitive and contrary to Article 21. Consequently, the Court granted bail on a bond of Rs. 15,000 with two sureties and imposed standard conditions regarding appearance, non‑tampering with evidence, and non‑intimidation of witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the seriousness of the offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
- Whether the stage of trial and the length of pre‑trial detention violate the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
- Constitution of India — s. Article 21
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- criminal procedure
- West Champaran
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8209 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-149 Year-2024 Thana- DHANAHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
Manish Sharma @ Manish Son of Shambhu Sharma @ Shambhu R/O Village
- Khalaritola, P.S.- Dhanaha, District - West Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Gauri Shankar Gupta, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 03-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2.The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S.Tr. No.
434 of 2025, arising out of Dhanaha P.S. Case No. 149 of 2024,
instituted for the offence under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
3. Earlier, on two occasions, vide order dated 02.12.2024
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 70409 of 2024 and vide order dated
06.08.2025 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 36498 of
2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court
considering the nature and gravity of the offence, with a liberty
to renew the prayer after five months if the trial is not
concluded.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
present one is the third attempt for grant of regular bail to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8209 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case is
framed and till date, only three prosecution witnesses have been
examined in this case. It has been submitted on behalf of the
petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 10.07.2024.
Learned counsel 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.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. In compliance of the order dated 03.02.2026 a report
dated 09.02.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial has
been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it appears
that out of seven prosecution witnesses, four prosecution
witnesses have been examined in this case. It is further reported
that the trial would be concluded within three months.
7. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8209 of 2026(3) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
Constitution of India, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
8. 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 Dhanaha P.S. Case
No. 149 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:
(I) One of the bailors shall be the petitioner’s own or
close member.
(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
fixed during the trial and shall not remain absent on two
consecutive dates without sufficient cause.
(III) The petitioner shall not tamper with the
prosecution evidence or influence/intimidate any witness during
the course of trial.
In case of violation of any of the aforesaid conditions,
the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the
petitioner.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
manish/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.