Patna High Court
Satyendra ChaudharyversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- SONI SHRIVASTAVA
Holding
Bail was not granted because the trial was at an advanced stage.
Summary
The petitioner, Satyendra Chaudhary, applied for renewal of bail after an earlier order allowed a fresh bail application if the trial was not concluded within five months. The court noted that the prosecution evidence had been closed and the case was at the stage of recording a statement under Section 351 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. Considering the advanced stage of the proceedings, the judge was not inclined to grant bail. The trial court was directed to expedite the trial and complete it within two months, avoiding unnecessary adjournments. Consequently, the bail application was denied.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner given the advanced stage of the trial and prior order permitting renewal of bail after five months.
- Whether the recording of a statement under Section 351 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, precludes the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 351
- trial delay
- adjournments
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.82612 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-500 Year-2023 Thana- RAFIGANJ District- Aurangabad
======================================================
Satyendra Chaudhary Son of Vijay Chaudhary R/o village Baligawn, P.S.-
Rafiganj, District - Aurangabad
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ashok Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Syed Mojibur Rahman, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA
ORAL ORDER
5 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. By way of present application, the prayer for bail of
the petitioner has been renewed on the ground that vide the
earlier order dated 21.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.5417 of
2025, liberty had been granted to the petitioner to renew the
prayer for bail in case the trial is not concluded within a period
of another five months as two Investigating Officers and the
Doctor remained to be examined.
3. By order dated 06.02.2026, a report had been called
for from the learned Court concerned which reveals that the
prosecution evidence has already been closed and the case was
at the stage of recording of the statement under Section 351 of
the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.82612 of 2025(5) dt.10-04-2026
2/2
4. Taking into consideration the advanced stage of the
case, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of bail to the
petitioner. However, the learned Trial court is directed to
conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible, preferably within
a period of two months without giving any unnecessary
adjournments.
(Soni Shrivastava, J)
Trivedi/-
U T
Checking your session…