Patna High Court
Shambhu Ray @ Sambhu Ray @ Shambhu GopeversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The Court granted regular bail, holding that continued pre‑trial detention would serve no purpose and would violate the petitioner’s Article 21 rights.
Summary
Shambhu Ray, accused of murder and related offences under Sections 307, 302, 34 of the IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act, has been in custody since March 2023. After three prior rejections of regular bail, he filed a fourth bail application, arguing that the trial is still pending, two witnesses remain to be examined, and his continued detention violates his Article 21 right to life and liberty. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the charges. The Patna High Court, noting the prolonged pre‑trial incarceration and lack of any substantive progress, held that continued detention would be punitive and contrary to constitutional principles. Consequently, the Court granted bail subject to a cash bond of Rs. 15,000 and two sureties, with conditions of appearance and family surety.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to regular bail despite the grave nature of the offences (murder, attempt to murder, conspiracy, and illegal arms possession).
- Whether the length of pre‑trial detention infringes the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act, 1959 — s. 27
- Constitution of India — s. Article 21
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 307, 34
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- murder
- IPC
- Arms Act
- high court
- criminal procedure
Judgment
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
3 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
Checking your session…