Patna High Court
Neelu Kumar @ Nilu KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court grants bail to the petitioner, subject to bond and surety conditions, as continued detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21.
Summary
Neelu Kumar was arrested in connection with a case under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read with Sections 25(1‑B)(a), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act. He has been in judicial custody since 24‑Oct‑2024 and his earlier bail application was rejected. The petitioner argued that continued pre‑trial detention violated his Article 21 right to liberty, especially since no witness had been examined and the trial was expected to conclude within six months. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the alleged offences. Considering the length of custody, the stage of the trial, lack of evidence examination, and the principle against punitive pre‑trial incarceration, the Court granted bail on condition of a Rs.15,000 bond with two sureties and compliance with attendance conditions.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the petitioner’s fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the stage of the trial and the absence of examined witnesses justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)(a), 26, 27, 35
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 109
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Arms Act
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- judicial custody
- fundamental rights
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83980 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-338 Year-2024 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Neelu Kumar @ Nilu Kumar S/O Virendra Ray @ Virendra Kumar R/O
Village- Turki Khararu, P.S- Minapur, District- Muzaffirpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 18-03-2026 Heard Mr. Alok Kumar Alok, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mrs. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Minapur P.S. Case No. 338 of 2024, instituted for the offences
under Section 109 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, read
with Sections 25(1-B)(a), 26, 27 and 35 of the Arms Act.
3. This is the second attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated
16.04.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 20294 of 2025 taking into
consideration the specific allegation of firing against the
petitioner supported by the medical report.
4. In compliance of the order dated 06.02.2026, a
report dated 11.02.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83980 of 2025(4) dt.18-03-2026
2/3
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that out of ten witnesses, no any witness has been
examined in this case. It is further reported that the trial is likely
to be concluded within a period of six months.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 24.10.2024
without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal
antecedent. It is also submitted that charge has already been
framed against the petitioner on 15.12.2025. Learned counsel
for the petitioner next submits 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 reiterated by Hon’ble Apex
Court in plethora of Judgments.
6. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, the period of custody undergone by the petitioner, the
present stage of the case as also charge has been framed against
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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83980 of 2025(4) dt.18-03-2026
3/3
of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, this Court is inclined
to grant bail to the petitioner.
8. Let the petitioner be released on bail after framing
of charge, if not already framed, 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 Minapur P.S. Case No. 338 of 2024,
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)
Rajorshi/-
U T
Checking your session…