Patna High Court
Mithlesh KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and violative of Article 21, and therefore granted bail subject to conditions.
Summary
Mithlesh Kumar was arrested in connection with a murder case (IPC sections 302, 201, 34) and an offence under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. The trial court had earlier denied regular bail, allowing a re‑application after six months. The petitioner argued that no prosecution witness had been examined, the trial was likely to take up to a year, and his continued custody would amount to punitive pre‑trial incarceration contrary to Article 21. The State opposed bail. After reviewing a trial‑stage report showing ten prosecution witnesses yet to be examined, the High Court found that the petitioner had no criminal antecedents and that his detention served no purpose, and therefore granted bail with monetary and personal surety conditions and standard non‑tampering and appearance requirements.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to an accused charged with murder, abetment of suicide and an offence under the SC/ST Act when no prosecution witnesses have been examined and the trial is expected to take up to a year.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 21
- Indian Penal Code — s. 201, 302, 34
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 3(2)(v)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- IPC
- SC/ST Act
- murder
- conspiracy
- trial delay
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86294 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2024 Thana- MOHANPUR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Mithlesh Kumar S/O Subindra Rai Resident of Village- Jalalpur Ward No. 7,
P.S.- Mohanpur, District- Samastipur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Pramod Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Binay Krishna, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
5 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. 676 of 2024, arising out of Mohanpur P.S. Case No. 68
of 2024, instituted for the offence under Sections 302, 201, 34
of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act.
3. Earlier vide order dated 29.01.2025 passed in Cr.
Appeal (SJ) No. 4428 of 2024, regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Bench considering the involvement of the
petitioner in the commission of the offence, with a liberty to
renew the prayer after six months if the trial is not concluded.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
earlier the F.I.R. has been registered u/s 302, 201, 34 of the
Indian Penal Code and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. But,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86294 of 2025(5) dt.03-04-2026
2/4
learned Court below has taken cognizance u/s 302 and 201/34 of
the Indian Penal Code on 26.09.2024. It is mainly submitted that
charge in this case is framed, but till date no prosecution witness
has been examined. It has been submitted on behalf of the
petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 03.07.2024 and
petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel further
submits that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in
the near future. He further submits that petitioner is not named
in the F.I.R., during the course of investigation the petitioner has
been arrested in this case and confessed his guilt before the
Police, which has no evidentiary value in the eye of law.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that other co-
accused has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this
Court vide order dated 04.11.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
75035 of 2025.
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 26.02.2026, a
report dated 13.03.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that there are ten prosecution witnesses, but prosecution
has not examined any witness so far. It is further reported that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86294 of 2025(5) dt.03-04-2026
3/4
the trial may be concluded within a period of one year.
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 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 Mohanpur P.S.
Case No. 68 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,
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86294 of 2025(5) dt.03-04-2026
4/4
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.