Patna High Court
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Sharma @ Dhillu Sharma @ Sonu Kumar SharmaversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- RAJIV ROY
Holding
The court granted bail to the petitioner with specific conditions to ensure his appearance and non-interference with the trial.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar Sharma, was in judicial custody for murder (IPC s.302/34) and illegal possession of arms (Arms Act s.27) arising from a 2020 incident in Patna where the victim was shot. The petitioner had previously been denied bail twice and had a history of multiple criminal antecedents, including an escape from custody. He pleaded that he would not commit further offences, would appear before the trial court regularly, and cited the prolonged detention and limited witness examination (only four of seventeen witnesses examined) as reasons for bail. The State opposed bail on the grounds of the serious nature of the offences and the petitioner’s prior escape. The High Court, noting the delay in trial, the petitioner’s undertaking, and the need to avoid unnecessary incarceration, granted bail subject to stringent conditions, including surety, regular court appearances, fortnightly police attendance, and prohibition on tampering with witnesses.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused of murder and arms offences with multiple criminal antecedents and a prior escape from custody.
- Whether the delay in trial and limited examination of witnesses justify the grant of bail.
- What conditions are appropriate to ensure the petitioner’s compliance and prevent interference with the trial.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Indian Penal Code — s. 302, 34
Subjects
- bail
- judicial custody
- murder
- arms offence
- criminal antecedents
- trial delay
- conditions of bail
- witness tampering
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3530 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-327 Year-2020 Thana- PATNA CITY CHOWK District- Patna
======================================================
Sonu Kumar @ Sonu Sharma @ Dhillu Sharma @ Sonu Kumar Sharma Son
of Ashok Sharma @ Ashok Kumar Sharma Resident of Vill- Bhadrghat, P.S.-
Alamganj, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nityanand Kumar, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
ORAL ORDER
6 13-02-2026 Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner is in judicial custody in connection
with Chowk P.S. Case No. 327 of 2020 for the offences under
sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of
Arms Act lodged on 05.10.2020 by the informant, Jyoti Devi.
3. As per the prosecution story, the informant alleged
that when her husband was going to his shop on motorcycle,
some accused persons riding motorcycle came and shot him
causing his death. She further alleged that due to payment
relating to sale/ purchase of the land, her husband had issue with
Ashok Yadav which led to the killing. Accordingly, the FIR.
4. Twice, the bail application of the petitioner has
been rejected and in this third attempt, report was called for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3530 of 2025(6) dt.13-02-2026
2/4
from the learned Trial Court.
5. The report dated 16.07.2025 shows that out of 17
charge-sheet witnesses, four have been examined.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
though he has multiple criminal antecedents, if granted relief, he
undertakes not to indulge in any criminal activity and shall
ensure his presence on each and every date before the Trial
Court. Failure to do so, steps can be taken for cancellation of his
bail bond. He further submits that the has already suffered by
being in custody earlier from 12.08.2021 to 15.06.2023 and
thereafter, from 26.09.2023 till date.
7. The submission is that the lady is not an eye-
witness to the occurrence and he is ready to abide by any terms
and conditions, if granted relief.
8. Learned APP, Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh opposes
the prayer submitting that he has multiple criminal antecedents
and on one occasion, also escaped from the judicial custody
while being taken to the Trial Court.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that for
that, he has already suffered and undertakes not to do any such
criminal act in future.
10. Considering the submissions of the parties as also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3530 of 2025(6) dt.13-02-2026
3/4
that there is delay in conclusion of the trial, only four witnesses
have been examined till the Trial Court Report came, he is in
custody for a long period, an undertaking has been given that
he shall be diligently appearing in trial and shall not indulge in
any criminal activity, this Court is inclined to extend him the
privilege of bail with conditions.
11. If however, he fails to abide by the terms and
conditions as undertaken, the State shall take immediate steps
for cancellation of the bail bond.
12. Let the petitioner be released on bail on
furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with
two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned
A.D.J. III, Patna City, Patna in connection with Chowk P.S.
Case No. 327 of 2020 subject to the following conditions:
(i) one of the bailor should be the family member of
the petitioner who shall provide official document to show
his/her bona fide;
(ii) the petitioner shall appear on each and every date
before the Trial Court and failure to do so for two consecutive
dates without plausible reason will entail cancellation of his
bail bond by the Trial Court itself;
(iii) the petitioner shall appear before the concerned
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3530 of 2025(6) dt.13-02-2026
4/4
police station every fortnight till the conclusion of the trial to
mark his attendance and at the end of the period, the certificate
be submitted to the Court;
(iv) the petitioner shall in no way try to induce or
promise or threat the witnesses or tamper with the evidences,
failing which the State shall be at liberty to take steps for
cancellation of the bail bonds;
(v) the petitioner shall desist from committing any
criminal offence again, failing which the State shall be at liberty
to take steps for cancellation of his bail bonds.
(Rajiv Roy, J)
Vijay Singh/-
U T
Checking your session…