Patna High Court
Dinanath PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
Regular bail was denied because the offence is grave, the petitioner is alleged to be part of a dacoit gang, and the trial has already commenced.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinanath Paswan, was arrested in connection with a loot case registered under Section 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, based largely on a confessional statement of a co‑accused. He applied for regular bail for the second time after an earlier bail application was rejected. The prosecution contended that the petitioner is a member of a dacoit gang and that the offence is grave, while noting that the trial has only progressed to framing of charges with no witness examination. The petitioner argued that his involvement was derived from a self‑culpatory statement and that he has been in custody since 18‑04‑2025. The Court, after considering the seriousness of the offence, the confession, and the fact that the trial is underway, declined to grant bail, dismissing the application. The order also directed the police to ensure attendance of witnesses in the ongoing trial.
Issues considered
- Whether regular bail can be granted to an accused of a serious offence under Section 310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita when the accusation is based on a co‑accused’s confession.
- Whether the stage of the trial (charges framed, no witness examination) warrants denial of bail.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 310(2)
Subjects
- bail
- serious offence
- loot
- confession
- dacoity
- trial stage
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 18778 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-102 Year-2025 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali
======================================================
Dinanath Paswan S/o- Jalim Paswan Village- Dilalbarpur PS- Lalganj Distt-
Vaishali
... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Prakash Chandra Jha, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 13-05-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. This is the 2nd attempt of the petitioner seeking bail
in connection with S.Tr. No. 544 of 2025 arising out of Lalganj
P.S. Case No. 102 of 2025 registered for the offence under
Sections 310(2) of the B.N.S.
3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioner was
rejected on 04.09.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 43633 of 2025 which
reads as follows:-
“Ref:- Cr. Misc. No. 41715 of 2025, Cr.
Misc. No. 43633 of 2025 & Cr. Misc. No.
50944 of 2025
These cases are arising out of the same
P.S. Case, hence, they are being heard together
and are being decided by a common order.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the
petitioners and learned APP for the State.
3. The petitioner seeks regular bail in
connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 102 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 18778 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
2/3
2025 registered for the offence under Section
310(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
4. As per the prosecution case, the
petitioners are accused of committing loot in the
house of the informant.
5. So far as the petitioner namely Sarita
Devi is concerned, she is the wife of the co-
accused Baidhnath Sahni, she went with
Baidhnath Sahani to jewellary shop of
coaccused Raja Kumar to sell the looted gold
jewellaries. On 05.03.2025, more than One
Lakh rupees was also deposited in her account.
She is in custody since 18.04.2025.
6. So far as the petitioner namely
Dinanath Paswan is concerned, his name has
come on the basis of the confessional statement
of co-accused Baidhnath Sahni. He has also
confessed his guilt in his confessional statement.
He appears to be member of the gang of
criminals/dacoits. He is in custody since
18.04.2025.
7. So far as the petitioner namely Manoj
Sahni @ Jila Sahni is concerned, at the instance
of the petitioner, the looted articles were
recovered from the house of the co-accused
Baidhnath Sahani and Arun Sah. He is in
custody since 09.03.2025.
8. Considering the aforesaid facts and
circumstances and also considering the
allegations levelled against these petitioners,
this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to
the petitioners.
9. Accordingly, these applications for
regular bail stands rejected.”
4. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner and
others are said to have committed loot in the informant’s house.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
name of the petitioner has come on the self-culpatory statement
of co-accused Baidhnath Sahni. The petitioner has also
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No. 18778 of 2026(3) dt.13-05-2026
3/3
confessed his guilt. The petitioner is in custody since
18.04.2025.
6. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for
bail and submitted that the petitioner is a member of gang of
dacoits.
7. In the trial, after rejection of the prayer for bail of
the petitioner earlier, only charges have been framed and no
witness has been examined.
8. Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact
that the trial has started, I am not inclined to grant bail to the
petitioner.
9. Accordingly, the application for regular bail is
hereby dismissed.
10. The Superintendent of Police, Vaishali and the
S.H.O., Lalganj are directed to ensure the attendance of the
witnesses in the trial.
11. Let a copy of the order be communicated to the
Superintendent of Police, Vaishali through FAX and e-mail
forthwith.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
sadique/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.