Patna High Court
Rajendra YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court grants bail to the petitioner subject to a bond of Rs. 15,000 and two sureties, with conditions of appearance.
Summary
Petitioner Rajendra Yadav was arrested in connection with a case under Section 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act for possession of a large quantity of powdered hemp. An earlier application for regular bail was rejected, and he has been in custody since 20 September 2024, with only two of five charge‑sheeted witnesses examined. The petitioner argued that continued pre‑trial detention violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The State opposed bail, citing the seriousness of the offence. The High Court, noting the prolonged detention, limited progress of the trial, and that co‑accused had been granted bail, held that continued incarceration would be punitive and contrary to Article 21, and therefore granted bail with a bond of Rs. 15,000 and two sureties, subject to conditions of appearance.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offence and recovery of a large quantity of powdered hemp.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the limited examination of witnesses and prolonged custody justify granting bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 317(5)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- right to liberty
- narcotics
- prohibition law
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.88626 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-324 Year-2024 Thana- DESARI District- Vaishali
======================================================
Rajendra Yadav Son of Late Satram Yadav @ Sant Ram Pure Bhikhari Singh
Resident of village- Samseriya PS -Musafir Distt -Amethi UP
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shanti Bhushan Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Iftekhar Mahmood, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
4 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Desari
(Chandpura O.P.) P.S. Case No. 324 of 2024 instituted for the
offence under Sections 317(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita,
2023 and Section 30(a) of the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act.
3. Earlier vide order dated 05.05.2025 passed in Cr.
Misc. No. 89537 of 2024, regular bail of the petitioner was
rejected by this Court considering the nature of accusation as
well as recovery of huge quantity of powdered hemp.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the
petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case charge
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88626 of 2025(4) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
has been framed on 23.08.2025 and only two wintesses have
been examined out of five charge-sheeted witnesses which is
evident from the report sent by the learned court below. It has
been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is
in custody since 20.09.2024. Learned counsel further submits
that there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the
near future. Learned counsel goes on to submit 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
is reiterated by Hon’ble Apex Court in plethora of judgments.
The co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this
Court vide order dated 22.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No.
55636 of 2025 and Cr. Misc. No. 55702 of 2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.88626 of 2025(4) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
petitioner.
7. 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 Desari (Chandpura
O.P.) P.S. Case No. 324 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)
Alok Verma/-
U T
Checking your session…