Patna High Court
Dilkhush YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
Bail is denied as there is no new ground and the trial is at an advanced stage for serious offences.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilkhush Yadav, was charged under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act for alleged firing. He applied for regular bail for the second time after an earlier bail denial. The trial report indicated that all charge‑sheet witnesses had been examined and the trial was expected to conclude within two months. The State opposed bail, relying on a Supreme Court decision (X vs. State of Rajasthan, 2024) that ordinarily bail should not be entertained once trial of serious offences has commenced. The High Court found no new ground for bail, noted the advanced stage of the trial, and rejected the bail application, directing the lower court to expedite the trial within one month and allowing a fresh bail application thereafter.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted at an advanced stage of trial for serious offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and the Arms Act
- Whether the Supreme Court’s observation in X vs. State of Rajasthan (2024) bars bail once trial has commenced
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- serious offences
- trial stage
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.90514 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-347 Year-2024 Thana- NAUGACHIA District- Bhagalpur
======================================================
Dilkhush Yadav Son of Vijay Yadav Resident of village - Dimaha, P.S.-
Gopalpur, District - Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mukesh Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Choubey Jawahar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
3 11-03-2026 Heard Mr. Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Choubey Jawahar, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with S. Tr.
No. 684 of 2025, arising out of Naugachia P.S. Case No. 347 of
2024 instituted for the offences under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of
the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 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 on merit by this Court vide order
dated 18.06.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 18149 of 2025, taking
into account the nature and gravity of the offence as also there
being direct allegation of firing against the petitioner.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90514 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026
2/3
4. In compliance of the order dated 17.01.2026, a
report dated 02.02.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial
has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it
appears that all the six charge sheet witnesses have been
examined in this case and statement of accused is also recorded
under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. It is further reported that trial is
likely to be concluded within a period of two months.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 21.11.2024
without any rhymes or reason, having eleven (11) criminal
antecedents. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
there is no likelihood of the trial being concluded in the near
future, hence, petitioner may be enlarged on bail.
6. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for
grant of bail. Learned APP has further relied upon a decision of
the Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2024 SCC Online SC 3539
(X. vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr.), wherein in paragraph No.14,
Hon’ble Apex Court has observed as under:
“14. Ordinarily in
serious offences like rape, murder,
dacoity, etc., once the trial
commences and the prosecution starts
examining its witnesses, the Court be
it the Trial Court or the High Court
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.90514 of 2025(3) dt.11-03-2026
3/3
should be loath in entertaining the
bail application of the accused.”
7. There is no new ground to consider the bail petition
of the petitioner. From the aforesaid report, it appears that the
trial is going on and is at an advance stage.
8. In view of the above, the prayer for bail of the
petitioner is again rejected with a direction to the court below to
expedite the trial and conclude the same expeditiously
preferably within a period of one months from today. If the trial
is not concluded within the period of one months, as stated
above, the petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer before
the court below.
(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…