Patna High Court
Saryug Chaudhary @ Sarju Choudhary @ SaryugversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted notwithstanding the earlier cancellation, subject to strict conditions to ensure the accused’s cooperation and prevent tampering with evidence.
Summary
The petitioner, Saryug Chaudhary, was arrested on 10 October 2025 in connection with a 2002 case involving offences under Sections 323, 325 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. He had earlier been granted bail in December 2002, appeared regularly until November 2019, after which he failed to appear and his bail was cancelled on 3 January 2020, a fact he was unaware of until he surrendered in October 2025. The trial report indicated that ten charge‑sheeted witnesses existed but none had been examined. The State opposed bail, citing a pending case against the petitioner, while the petitioner’s counsel argued lack of knowledge of the cancellation. The High Court, after considering the circumstances, granted bail on a Rs 10,000 bond with two sureties, imposing conditions of cooperation, physical presence, non‑tampering with evidence, and verification of criminal antecedents.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of a bail cancellation when the accused claims lack of knowledge of such cancellation?
- Can bail be granted after a prolonged period of custody and after prior bail has been cancelled?
- Do pending cases against the accused preclude the grant of bail in the present matter?
- What conditions may be imposed by the court while granting bail?
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 307, 323, 325
Subjects
- bail
- cancellation of bail
- IPC
- assault
- grievous hurt
- attempt to murder
- trial delay
- conditions of bail
- criminal antecedents
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85318 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-60 Year-2002 Thana- IMAMGANJ District- Gaya
======================================================
Saryug Chaudhary @ Sarju Choudhary @ Saryug Son of Late Tulsi
Choudhary R/o - Village Pakardih, P.S. - Imamganj, District - Gaya.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shailesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA
ORAL ORDER
3 19-01-2026 Heard Mr. Shailesh Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, learned APP for the
State.
2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since
10.10.2025, in connection with Imamganj P.S. Case No. 60 of
2002, F.I.R. dated 03.09.2002 registered for the offences
punishable under Sections 323, 325, 307 of the Indian Penal
Code.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has been granted bail in the present case on
04.12.2002 by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Sherghati and thereafter the petitioner was regularly appeared in
the trial Court till 06.11.2019 and thereafter the petitioner had
not appeared before the learned trial Court and hence the
learned Trial Court has cancelled his bail bond vide order dated
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85318 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
2/3
03.01.2020. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner has no knowledge about the cancellation of his bail
bond so he has not come before the learned Trial court and he
was in impression that his Advocate is pursuing the matter
before the learned Trial court. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that when he came to know about the cancellation of his
bail bond he has surrendered on 10.10.2025.
4. Vide order dated 10.12.2025, a report was called
for with regard the stage of the trial. Report of the learned Trial
Court dated 22.12.2025 reveals that there are total 10
chargesheeted witnesses in the present case and no any
prosecution witness has been examined by the prosecution.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the
petitioner and submits that the petitioner carries one more case
other than the present one but fairly submits that petitioner is on
bail in the pending matter.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand)
with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of
learned District & Additional Sessions Judge 1 st, Sherghati,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85318 of 2025(3) dt.19-01-2026
3/3
Gaya in connection with Imamganj P.S. Case No. 60 of 2002,
subject to the following conditions :-
(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be
properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court
and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and
on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient
reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the
witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move
for cancellation of bail.
(3) And, further condition that the court below shall
verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at
any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his
criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for
cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the
acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order
shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of
verification.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J)
Ibrar//-
U T
Checking your session…