Shambhu Ray @ Sambhu Ray @ Shambhu Gope v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2126 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-24 Year-2013 Thana- AKILPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Shambhu Ray @ Sambhu Ray @ Shambhu Gope Son of Govardhan Rai Resident of Village - Harshamchak, P.S.- Akilpur, District - Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Pramod Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 11-03-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Session Trial Case No. 593 of 2024 arising out of Akilpur P.S. Case No. 24 of 2013 instituted for the offence under Sections 307, 302 & 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Earlier vide orders dated 08.04.2024, 06.12.2024 & 01.09.2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 74412 of 2023, Cr. Misc. No. 70274 of 2024 & Cr. Misc. No. 45679 of 2025, regular bail of the petitioner was rejected by this Court with a liberty in the last rejection order to renew the prayer after three months if the trial is not concluded.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2126 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026 2/3 present one is the fourth attempt for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case is framed and till date, two witness are yet to be examined. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 23.03.2023, having five criminal antecedents. 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

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2126 of 2026(3) dt.11-03-2026 3/3 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 No. 593 of 2024 arising out of Akilpur P.S. Case No. 24 of 2013, 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