Patna High Court
Sumit Kumar Rai @ Sumit Rai @ Sumit KumarversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner, holding that continued pre‑trial detention would be punitive and contrary to Article 21.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumit Kumar Rai, was arrested in July 2022 and charged under Sections 302, 201 and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. He had been denied bail twice earlier, with the court noting the seriousness of the allegations and the stage of the trial. Counsel argued that the petitioner had no prior criminal record and that his continued pre‑trial detention violated Article 21 of the Constitution. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the gravity of the offences. Considering the prolonged custody, lack of trial progress, and the constitutional right to liberty, the court granted bail subject to a cash bond and surety conditions, and required the petitioner’s regular appearance in court.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite being charged with murder, concealment of evidence and criminal conspiracy.
- Whether the length of pre‑trial detention infringes the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21.
- Whether the stage of trial and examination of witnesses justify the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 201, 302
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- IPC Section 302
- IPC Section 201
- IPC Section 120(B)
- criminal law
- right to liberty
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23017 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-229 Year-2022 Thana- EKMA District- Saran
======================================================
Sumit Kumar Rai @ Sumit Rai @ Sumit Kumar S/o Janak Rai R/o Village -
Radhiya, P.S - Maharajganj, District - Siwan
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mrs. Renu Kumari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 03-04-2026 Heard Mr. Chandra Mohan Jha, learned counsel for
the petitioner and Mrs. Renu Kumari, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ekma
P.S. Case No. 229 of 2022, instituted for the offences under
Sections 302, 201, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.
3. This is the third attempt of the petitioner for bail.
The petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of regular bail
which was earlier rejected by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court
vide order dated 11.10.2023 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 72457 of
2022 taking into consideration the nature of allegation and was
again rejected by this Court vide order dated 13.10.2025 passed
in Cr. Misc. No. 71191 of 2025 taking into account the present
stage of trial.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23017 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 04.07.2022
without any rhymes or reason and has got no criminal
antecedent. It is submitted that regular bail of the petitioner was
dismissed by this Court vide order dated 13.10.2025 passed in
Cr. Misc. No. 71191 of 2025 in which he was granted
observation to renew his prayer for bail before the Trial Court if
the trial is not concluded within a period of three months and it
was submitted that out of ten charge-sheeted witnesses, only
seven witnesses have been examined in this case, but there is no
any progress in the trial till date. 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.
5. Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed
the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of
the case, present stage 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
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23017 of 2026(2) dt.03-04-2026
3/3
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.
7. 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 Ekma P.S. Case No.
229 of 2022, 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
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.