Patna High Court
Sonu Kumar Giri @ Sonu GiriversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL GRANTED
- Bench
- R P MISHRA
Holding
The court held that bail must be granted, as continued detention would be punitive and contrary to the spirit of Article 21.
Summary
The petitioner, Sonu Kumar Giri, was charged under several serious provisions of the Indian Penal Code (sections 272, 273, 328, 307, 304, 120(B) & 34) and the Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act (sections 30(a), 37(b), 33 & 34) in case No. 377 of 2022. He had been in judicial custody since 31‑05‑2025, despite having two prior criminal antecedents, and no witness had yet been examined. The petitioner’s counsel argued that the prolonged pre‑trial detention violated his fundamental right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The State opposed bail, citing the gravity of the offences. The High Court, noting that continued detention would amount to punitive pre‑trial incarceration and would not serve any legitimate purpose, granted bail subject to a cash bond of Rs. 15,000 and two sureties, with conditions regarding family surety and appearance at trial dates.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail despite the seriousness of the offences charged.
- Whether continued pre‑trial detention infringes the petitioner’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
- Whether the conditions imposed by the court are sufficient to ensure the petitioner’s attendance at trial.
Legislation cited
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act — s. 30(a), 33, 34, 37(b)
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120(B), 272, 273, 304, 307, 328, 34
Subjects
- bail
- pre‑trial detention
- Article 21
- Indian Penal Code
- Bihar Prohibition and Excise Act
- fundamental rights
- serious offences
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36098 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-377 Year-2022 Thana- AMNAUR District- Saran
======================================================
Sonu Kumar Giri @ Sonu Giri Son of Late Mukti Nath Giri @ Mukti Ram
Giri Resident of Village- Dhoop Nagar, Dhobawal, P.S.- Khaira, District-
Saran (Chapra)
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarendar Kumar, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nirmal Kumar Sinha, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH
MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
2 19-06-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP
for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Amnour No. 377 of 2022 instituted for the offence under
Sections 272, 273, 328, 307, 304, 120(B) & 34 of the Indian
Penal Code and Sections 30(a), 37(b), 33 & 34 of the Bihar
Prohibition and Excise Act. Earlier vide order dated 20.11.2025,
passed in Cr. Misc. No. 44841 of 2025, regular bail of the
petitioner was rejected by this Court.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
present one is the second attempt for grant of regular bail to the
petitioner. It is mainly submitted that charge in this case is
framed and till date, no witness has been examined. It has been
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36098 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026
2/3
submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in
custody since 31-05-2025, having two (2) 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
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 Amnour No. 377 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36098 of 2026(2) dt.19-06-2026
3/3
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)
Raj Kishore/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.