Patna High Court
Bipin Saw @ Bipin sao @ Bipin SahversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The Court held that regular bail could not be granted to the petitioners and dismissed the bail application.
Summary
The petitioners, Bipin Saw and Shubhag Saw, were charged with offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 427, 436 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, Section ¾ of the Explosive Substances Act and Sections 10 and 13 of the UAPA for allegedly using a cylinder bomb to damage a Harizan school. They have been in custody since July 2023 and earlier bail applications were rejected. The petitioners claimed innocence and pointed to the grant of bail to a co‑accused, while the State relied on the Supreme Court’s decision in Gurwinder Singh v. State of Punjab (Cr Appeal No. 704 of 2024) to argue that bail is not appropriate in such serious cases. The High Court, applying the Supreme Court’s guidelines and considering the gravity of the offences, declined to grant regular bail. The court ordered the trial court to expedite the trial, directed the Superintendent of Police to ensure witness attendance, and dismissed the bail application.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to regular bail despite being charged with serious offences under the IPC, Explosive Substances Act and UAPA.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s guidelines in Gurwinder Singh v. State of Punjab apply to deny bail in this case.
Legislation cited
- Explosive Substances Act — s. 3
- Indian Penal Code — s. 120, 147, 148, 149, 427, 436
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act — s. 10, 13
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Explosive Substances Act
- UAPA
- serious offences
- Supreme Court guidelines
- trial acceleration
- witness attendance
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20055 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2014 Thana- KAJRA District- Lakhisarai
======================================================
1. Bipin Saw @ Bipin sao @ Bipin Sah S/O Sharwan Saw @ Sharwan Sah
R/O Vill.- Khaira, P.S- Kajra, District- Lakhisarai
2. Shubhag Saw @ Subhag Sao S/O Rohan Saw R/O Vill.- Khaira, P.S- Kajra,
District- Lakhisarai
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mayank Bilochan
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 30-04-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the
learned APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the
petitioners seeking bail in connection with Kajra P.S. Case No.
19 of 2014 registered for the offence under Section 147, 148,
149, 427, 436, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and under Section
¾ of the Explosive Substance Act and under Section 10,13 of
the UAP, Act.
3. Earlier, the bail application of the petitioners was
rejected on 13.09.2024 in Cr. Misc. No. 33570 of 2024, which
reads as follows:
Heard learned counsel for the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20055 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
2/3
petitioners and learned APP for the
State.
2. The petitioners seek bail in
connection with Kajra P.S. Case No.
19 of 2014 registered for the offence
under Section 147, 148, 149, 427, 436,
120B of the Indian Penal Code and
under Section ¾ of the Explosive
Substance Act and under Section 10,13
of the UAP, Act.
3. As per the prosecution case,
100–150 criminals came and by using
cylinder bomb, have blasted and
damaged a Harizan School.
4. Learned counsel for the
petitioners submits that the petitioners
are innocent, and they have falsely
been implicated in this case. He further
submits that bail of one other co-
accused namely Mantu Kora has been
granted bail by this Court vide order
dated 21.05.2021 passed in Cr. Misc.
No. 2001 of 2021. He further submitted
that petitioners are in jail since
03.07.2023 and 17.07.2023
respectively.
5. Learned APP for the State has
relied upon a decision of Hon’ble
Supreme Court passed in the case of
Gurwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab
and Anr., bearing Criminal Appeal No.
704 of 2024, and has submitted that
this is not a fit case for grant of
regular bail registered under UAP Act.
He further submitted that the
petitioners are accused in four more
cases, and they are named in the F.I.R.
6. Considering the facts and
circumstances of the case and also in
view of the guidelines issued by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of
Gurwinder Singh Vs. The State of
Punjab and Another (Supra), I am not
inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, this application is
dismissed.
8. The trial Court is directed to
expedite the trial of the petitioners and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20055 of 2026(2) dt.30-04-2026
3/3
conclude the same at the earliest.
4. The petitioners are in custody since 31.07.2023 and
03.07.2023 respectively. The charges were framed on
28.02.2024, but no witness has been examined till date.
5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case
as well as the nature and gravity of the offence, this Court is not
inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the
present application for regular bail filed on behalf of the
petitioners stands rejected.
6. The Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai is directed
to ensure the attendance of the witnesses during the trial and to
submit a report to this Court.
7. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Superintendent of Police, Lakhisarai through FAX or e-mail for
immediate compliance.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
Shishir/-
U T
Checking your session…