Sunny Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14720 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-197 Year-2024 Thana- PUNPUN District- Patna ====================================================== Sunny Kumar Son of Anirudh Singh Resident of village - Mahmadlichak, Police Station - Naubatpur, District - Patna (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Abhijeet Gautam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 10-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Punpun P.S. Case No. 197 of 2024, instituted for the offences under Sections 103(1) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

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 08.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 27507 of 2025 taking into consideration the nature and gravity of the offence. 4.

In compliance of the order dated 25.02.2026, a report dated 11.03.2026 with regard to the present stage of trial has been received. From perusal of the aforesaid report, it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14720 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026 2/3 appears that out of six charge-sheeted witnesses, only two witnesses have been examined in this case and summon has been issued for examination of rest of the witnesses. It is further reported that the trial is likely to be concluded within a period of twelve months.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 12.08.2024 without any rhymes or reason and has got one 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. 6.

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.

7. 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.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14720 of 2026(3) dt.10-04-2026 3/3 8.

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 Punpun P.S. Case No. 197 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) Rajorshi/- U T