Raj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19912 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-35 Year-2025 Thana- Haraiya District- East Champaran ====================================================== Raj Kumar S/O Late Santosh Prasad Resident of Village/Mohalla - Ashram Tola, Raxaul, P.S.- Raxaul, District - East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Madhurendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Parmanand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 03-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2.
The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Haraiya P.S. Case No. 35 of 2025, instituted for the offences under Sections 21(c), 23(c) and 29 of the NDPS 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 by this Court vide order dated 10.09.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 43337 of 2025 taking into consideration the recovery of contraband beyond commercial quantity.
4.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 09.04.2025
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19912 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026 2/3 without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits 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 reiterated by Hon'ble Apex Court in plethora of Judgments. It is lastly submitted that other co-accused has been enlarged on regular bail on second attempt vide order dated 11.03.2026, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9549 of 2026.
5.
Learned APP 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, the period of custody undergone by 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.
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 Haraiya P.S. Case
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19912 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026 3/3 No. 35 of 2025, 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) Raj Kishore/- U T