Ajeet Kumar Yadav @ Ajeet Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33522 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-183 Year-2025 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali ====================================================== Ajeet Kumar Yadav @ Ajeet Kumar S/o Kishundeo Ray R/o- Village - Tajpur Bujurg, P.S.- Mahua, District - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Nand Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 15-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Session Case No. 670 of 2025, 742 of 2025 arising out of Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 183 of 2025 instituted for the offence under Sections 310(2), 109, 317(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 27 of the Arms Act.

3. Earlier, vide order dated 16.01.2026 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 53017 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence with a liberty to renew the prayer after three months if the trial is not concluded.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33522 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026 2/3 present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. It is mainly submitted that in this case, charge has been framed on 11.11.2025 and since then, not a single witness has been examined. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 07.03.2025 and has 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.

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 petitioner.

7. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33522 of 2026(2) dt.15-05-2026 3/3 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 Session Case No. 670 of 2025, 742 of 2025 arising out of Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 183 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.

(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, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Alok Verma/- U T