Patna High Court
Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay RavidasversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail should be granted to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Kumar, was arrested in connection with a case registered under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Arms Act and the Information Technology Act, and has been in custody since 3 October 2024. An earlier application for regular bail was rejected, with the court allowing a fresh application after six months. The petitioner’s counsel argued that no charge had been framed, no witness examined, and that continued detention violated Article 21 of the Constitution. The State opposed the bail. Considering the prolonged pre‑trial detention, lack of trial progress and the constitutional principle against punitive pre‑trial incarceration, the court granted bail subject to a cash bond and surety conditions. The petitioner was ordered to appear at every trial date, with bail liable to be cancelled on two consecutive defaults.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, Arms Act and IT Act
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention violates the right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution
- Whether the absence of framed charges and examination of witnesses warrants grant of bail
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-B)a, 26, 35
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 111(2)(b), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 339, 340(2), 341(1), 342(1), 3(5), 61(2)
- Information Technology Act — s. 66(c), 66(D)
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- fundamental rights
- criminal procedure
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Arms Act
- IT Act
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3198 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-379 Year-2024 Thana- GRIYAK District- Nalanda
======================================================
Sanjay Kumar @ Sanjay Ravidas S/o Ram Kishun Ravidas @ Ramksihun
Ravidas R/o Village - Rasalpur, P.S - Katrisarai, District - Nalanda
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Prasad Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Giriak
P.S. Case No. 379 of 2024 instituted for the offence under
Sections 342(1), 316(2), 318(4), 319(2), 336(3), 338, 339,
340(2), 341(1), 3(5), 61(2) & 111(2)(b) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
Sanhita, 2023, Sections 25(1-B)a, 26 & 35 of the Arms Act and
Sections 66(c) & 66(D) of the I.T. Act. Earlier vide order dated
15-04-2025, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 2685 of 2025, regular bail
of the petitioner was rejected by this Court with a liberty to
renew the prayer after six months if the trial is not concluded.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3198 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
2/3
petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case is even
not framed and till date, no witness has been examined. It has
been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is
in custody since 03-10-2024, having no criminal antecedent.
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
bail bonds of Rs. 15,000/- (Fifteen Thousand) with two sureties
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3198 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026
3/3
of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court
below/concerned Court in connection with Giriak P.S. Case No.
379 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)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…