If a public servant is arrested and kept in judicial custody for more than 48 hours, he/she is deemed to have been suspended, the Supreme Court has ruled.“Once a public servant is arrested and remains in judicial custody for more than 48 hours, there is a deemed suspension. Being a public servant, he could be said to have been placed under deemed suspension. No specific order is required to be passed in this regard,” a Bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice Manmohan said.The Bench, however, restored the bail granted to Vishwajeet Singh, the Administrator of Sadar Hospital, Samastipur, Bihar, accused of demanding a bribe of Rs 4,000 for clearing a contractual worker’s pending wages of Rs 36,421.While allowing his appeal, the top court set aside the July 1, 2026, order of the Patna High Court cancelling the bail granted to Singh by the sessions court.An FIR was lodged against Singh at the Vigilance police station in 2025 under Section 7(b) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. He remained in judicial custody for nearly 15 days before the sessions court granted him bail. However, at the instance of the complainant, the Patna High Court cancelled his bail and sent him back to jail.Singh was initially suspended following his arrest, but his suspension was subsequently revoked.The Supreme Court chose to restore his bail, noting that the High Court intervened nearly a year after his release on bail.The tenor of the High Court’s order suggested that the sessions court’s reference to the bribe amount being paltry had weighed with it while cancelling the bail.“Ordinarily, in cases of this type, having regard to the maximum punishment that the trial court would impose ultimately if the accused is held to be guilty, bail is to be granted,” the top court said, adding that bail could be denied in cases involving criminal antecedents or where the facts and circumstances were particularly grave.The amount allegedly demanded as a bribe was not a relevant consideration in deciding a bail plea. It observed that the High Court could have disagreed with the sessions court’s description of the amount as “paltry” without cancelling the bail, the Supreme Court said, even as it highlighted a “disturbing feature” about the service status of the accused after his arrest.“And, shockingly, he has been once again posted in the very same hospital and that too on the very same post,” it said, asking the Bihar Government to examine the matter at the earliest and take appropriate action in accordance with the law.