Patna High Court
Raju Sahni @ LangraversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
Bail was denied as the petitioners are absconders and the evidence on record does not warrant release.
Summary
The petitioners, Raju Sahni and Harihar Sahni, applied for bail in a session trial (No. 968/2025) arising from a 2011 incident where miscreants allegedly threatened and entered a house with weapons and explosives. The prosecution alleged offences under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Arms Act, the Explosive Substances Act and the Criminal Law Amendment Act. The petitioners claim innocence, stating they are not named in the FIR and were only mentioned in a co-accused's confessional statement, and they have prior criminal antecedents. The court noted that both petitioners are absconders in a related 2011 case and considered the material on record. Consequently, the bail application was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to the petitioners despite being absconders and implicated through a co-accused's confession.
- Whether the petitioners' claim of false implication and lack of naming in the FIR suffices for bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 27
- Criminal Law Amendment Act — s. 17
- Explosive Substances Act — s. 3, 4
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 307, 341, 342, 380, 427, 436, 452
Subjects
- bail
- absconding
- false implication
- IPC
- criminal procedure
- high court
- session trial
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20082 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2011 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran
======================================================
1. Raju Sahni @ Langra S/o Harihar Sahni R/o vill- Basahiya, PS- Panapur,
District- Saran, Chapra
2. Harihar Sahni S/o Late Hawaldar Sahani R/o vill- Basahiya, PS- Panapur,
District- Saran, Chapra
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate
Mr. Sunil Prasad Singh, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 01-04-2026 Heard, Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned senior
counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners seeks bail in connection Sessions
Trial No. 968/2025 (arising out of Panapur P.S. Case No.
08/2011) dated 03.02.2011 for the offences punishable under
Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 341, 342, 427, 380, 436 and 307 of
the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act, Sections 3
and 4 of the Explosive Substance Act and Section 17 of the
C.L.A. Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, on 03.02.2011 the
informant and her daughter-in-law and other family members
were having dinner, in the meantime, some miscreants with
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20082 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026
2/2
deadly weapon arrived at her home. The miscreants threatened
to demolish the house of the informant with explosive.
Thereafter, they entered the house and started misbehaving with
the house members and started damaging various objects of the
house.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the
petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this
case. The petitioner no. 1 is in custody since 17.06.2025 and the
petitioner no. 2 is in custody since 23.07.2025 and have two
criminal antecedents. The petitioners are not named in the FIR.
The name of the petitioners have come in the confessional
statement of the co-accused. The petitioner are absconder in a
case of 2011.
5. Considering the materials available on the record
and the fact that the petitioners are absconder, this application is
dismissed.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
atul/-
U T
Checking your session…