Parmendra Kumar @ Parmendra Manjhi v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26303 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-616 Year-2024 Thana- HARSIDHI District- East Champaran ====================================================== Parmendra Kumar @ Parmendra Manjhi S/o Bali Manjhi Resident of village - Chilraon, P.S.- Turkauliya, Distt.- East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhishek Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. N.N. Tiwari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 08-05-2026 Heard Mr. Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. N.N. Tiwari, learned APP for the State. 2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Session Trial Case No. 253 of 2025 arising out of Harsidhi P.S. Case No. 616 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 103, 61 & 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Earlier vide order dated 13.08.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 29075 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court.

3.

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 is framed and till date, six (6) out of ten (10) prosecution witnesses

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26303 of 2026(3) dt.08-05-2026 2/3 have been examined. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 19.11.2024, having one criminal antecedent. 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. 4.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. 5.

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.

6.

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Session Trial Case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26303 of 2026(3) dt.08-05-2026 3/3 No. 253 of 2025, arising out of Harsidhi P.S. Case No. 616 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) Raj Kishore/- U T