Patna High Court
Arun SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The bail application was dismissed, upholding the earlier order denying bail.
Summary
The petitioner, Arun Sah, was arrested in connection with a dacoity alleged to have involved theft of Rs.18 lakh in cash and gold ornaments, and was charged under Section 310(2) of the B.N.S., 2023. The prosecution’s case relied on a self‑inculpatory statement of co‑accused Baidhnath Sahni and the recovery of the stolen items from the petitioner. The petitioner applied for regular bail, claiming innocence and noting that a co‑accused had been granted bail, but the trial had already commenced and the charge was framed on 10‑09‑2025. The court examined the gravity of the offence, the fact that the trial was underway, and the absence of any fresh ground for bail. Consequently, the court affirmed its earlier order and dismissed the bail application, indicating that the petitioner could seek bail again only if the prosecution caused further delay.
Issues considered
- Whether bail should be granted to the petitioner under Section 310(2) of the B.N.S., 2023 in view of the seriousness of the offence and the commencement of trial.
Legislation cited
- B.N.S., 2023 — s. 310(2)
Subjects
- bail
- criminal procedure
- Section 310(2)
- B.N.S.
- trial commencement
- self‑inculpatory statement
- serious offence
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13000 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2025 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali
======================================================
Arun Sah Son of Krishna Sah Resident of Village- Gurmiya (Chandwara),
P.S.- Kartaha, District- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Siyaram Shahi, Advocate
Mr.Balgovind Sharma, Advocate
Ms. Shabima Talat, Advocate
For the State : Mr.Manoj Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 23-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the
petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Lalganj P.S. Case
No. 102 of 2025 registered for the offence under Sections
310(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has
been rejected vide order dated 09.07.2025 passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 39504 of 2025, which reads as under:
“Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seek regular bail in
connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 102 of
2025 registered for the offence under Sections
310(2) of the B.N.S., 2023.
3. As per the prosecution case,
unknown criminals have committed dacoity of
Rs.18 lakh cash and gold ornaments. They have
looted Rs.1 lakh from the cash counter. The
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13000 of 2026(2) dt.23-02-2026
2/2
name of the petitioners have come in the self
inculpatory statement of co-accused Baidhnath
Sahni. The looted gold jewellery and money has
been recovered from the petitioners.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners
submits that the petitioners are innocent and
have not committed any offence. She submits
that one of the co-accused person has been
granted bail. The petitioners are in custody
since 18.04.2025.
5. Learned A.P.P. appearing for the
State has vehemently opposed the prayer for
bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts
and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant
bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, this application for
regular bail is hereby rejected.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
charge has been framed on 10.09.2025.
5. Considering the gravity of the offence, the fact that
the trial has started and also the fact that no fresh ground for
grant of bail is made out, I am not inclined to review my earlier
order.
6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
7. If the trial is delayed by the prosecution, the
petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
P. Kumar
U T
Checking your session…