Manjoor @ Md. Manjoor @ Md. Manjur v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.47037 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-221 Year-2024 Thana- GHANSHYAMPUR District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Manjoor @ Md. Manjoor @ Md. Manjur S/O Late Motiurahman R/O Vill.- Zirat, P.s.- Ghanshyampur, Dist.- Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sameer Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Ram Anurag Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-07-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Session Trial Case No. 517 of 2024 arising out of Ghanshyampur P.S. Case No. 221 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Section 103 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. Earlier vide order dated 12.09.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 28579 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court, taking into account that the trial is already in progress and seven witnesses had already been examined. 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47037 of 2026(2) dt.10-07-2026 2/3 framed and till date, only seventeen (17) out of twenty-seven

(27) witnesses have been examined. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 24.07.2024, having no 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.47037 of 2026(2) dt.10-07-2026 3/3 of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with Session Trial Case No. 517 of 2024, arising out of Ghanshyampur P.S. Case No. 221 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.

7. Pending Interlocutory Application/s, if any, stands disposed of.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U T