Patna High Court
Arun Kumar Mehta @ Arun Mehta @ Arun MahtoversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- ARUN KUMAR JHA
Holding
Bail was not granted and the petition was dismissed.
Summary
Arun Kumar Mehta, who has been in custody since 18 May 2020, filed a petition seeking bail after his earlier bail applications were rejected on three occasions. The petitioner argued that the trial is still pending, all prosecution witnesses have been examined, and the statement of a co‑accused could not be recorded because that co‑accused is in custody in another state. The State opposed bail, contending that the trial is nearing its conclusion and there is no material ground to revisit the earlier refusals. The Court noted the seriousness of the allegations, the fact that the case is at the stage of recording statements under Section 313 of the CrPC, and the prior rejections, and therefore declined to grant bail. However, the Court directed the trial court to expedite the trial given the petitioner’s prolonged pre‑trial detention and to take appropriate steps if any co‑accused remains unavailable. The petition was consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an under‑trial accused who has been in custody for a prolonged period and whose trial is pending.
- Whether the inability to record the statement of a co‑accused, who is in custody in another state, warrants reconsideration of bail.
- Whether the seriousness of the allegations and prior bail rejections preclude the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Narcotic Substances (Control) Act — s. 351
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 313
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Section 313 CrPC
- co‑accused statement
- criminal procedure
- high court
- petition
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.85642 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2020 Thana- BIDUPUR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Arun Kumar Mehta @ Arun Mehta @ Arun Mahto S/O Late Vishwanath
Mehta @ Vishwanath Singh Mahto Resident of Village- Panapur, P.S-
Bidupur, District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ram Shankar Prasad, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Satyendra Prasad, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
6 10-04-2026 The petitioner has approached this Court renewing his
prayer for bail as his prayer for bail was rejected earlier vide
order dated 0.03.2021 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 37024 of 2020
and order dated 12.06.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 66638 of
2021.
02. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner is in custody since 18.05.2020 and trial has not yet
been concluded. Learned counsel further submits that though all
prosecution witnesses have been examined, one of the
coaccused is in custody in the State of Jharkhand in some other
case and for this reason the statement of the accused persons
could not be recorded under Section 313 CrPC/ Section 351 of
BNSS. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has
been in custody for quite long time as an under trial and his
prayer for bail may be considered sympathetically.
03. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.85642 of 2025(6) dt.10-04-2026
2/2
the petitioner for bail and submits that thrice the prayer for bail
of the petitioner has been rejected and trial has reached its fag
end there is no material for reconsideration for the prayer for
bail of the petitioner.
04. Having regard to the fact that all the prosecution
witnesses have been examined and the matter is fixed for
recording the Statement of the coaccused under Section 313 of
the CrPC and also considering the serious nature of allegation
against the petitioner and rejection of the prayer for bail thrice,,
I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail for the present.
However, the learned trial court is reminded that the petitioner is
in continuous custody since 18.05.2020 and it should take all
steps for early conclusion of trial and if there is any difficulty in
ensuring the presence of any coaccused, the Court concerned
may pass appropriate orders.
05. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of.
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Anuradha/-
U T
Checking your session…