Patna High Court

Krishna Kumar Sahni @ Krishna SahniversusThe State of Bihar

Decided: 7 May 2026
Disposal: BAIL REJECTED
Bench: ANSHUMAN

Holding

Anticipatory bail is denied to the petitioner.

Summary

Krishna Kumar Sahni applied for anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 359 of 2025, which alleges that Ram Janam Sahani fired a pistol killing his wife, with Sahni named among five accused. The petitioner argued he had no specific allegation against him, no overt act, and a clean record, seeking bail. The State contended that the case diary showed Sahni was present in the mob that fled after the shooting. The Patna High Court examined the presence of the petitioner in the mob and the lack of specific incriminating act, and concluded that mere presence was sufficient to deny anticipatory bail. The Court rejected the anticipatory bail application, directing the petitioner to surrender within six weeks and the trial court to decide his bail on merits.

Issues considered

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted when the petitioner is named in the FIR but no specific act is alleged against him.
Whether mere presence in a mob implicated in a shooting justifies denial of anticipatory bail.

Legislation cited

Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 27, 35
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 103(1), 3(5)

Subjects

anticipatory bail
criminal procedure
arms act
mob participation
FIR
bail denial

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                              CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20225 of 2026
                   Arising Out of PS. Case No.-359 Year-2025 Thana- KALYANPUR District- Samastipur
                 ======================================================
                 Krishna Kumar Sahni @ Krishna Sahni S/O Kapsi Sahni @Kapileshwar
                 Sahani R/o Village - Bhagirathpur, P.S- Kalyanpur, District- Samastipur

                                                                                 ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                      Versus

                 The State of Bihar

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :      Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate
                 For the Opposite Party/s :      Mr. Bharat Bhushan, APP
                 ======================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN
                                       ORAL ORDER

3   07-05-2026                    Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

                   APP for the State.

                                2. The petitioner is apprehending arrest in connection

                   with Kalyanpur P.S. Case No. 359 of 2025, dated 28.10.2025,

                   lodged under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya

                   Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “BNS, 2023”) and

                   Section 27 of the Arms Act. Further Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and

                   35 of the Arms Act has also been added, pending before the

                   Court of C.J.M., Samastipur.

                                3. As per the prosecution, FIR has been lodged against

                   five named accused persons including the present petitioner. The

                   specific allegation is against one accused person, namely, Ram

                   Janam Sahani, who allegedly fired from a pistol upon the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20225 of 2026(3) dt.07-05-2026
                                            2/3




          husband of the informant, due to which he died on the spot, and

          thereafter all the accused persons fled away.

                       4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

          petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel

          further submits that it is true that the name of the petitioner is

          present in the FIR, but there is no specific allegation against

          him, nor any act or overt act has been attributed to him. Counsel

          further submits that no independent witness has seen the

          occurrence. Counsel further submits that the criminal antecedent

          of the petitioner is clean and he deserves bail.

                       5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for

          bail of the petitioner and submits that with a view to verify the

          allegations made in the FIR, the case diary has been called for

          and upon perusal of the same, particularly paragraph nos. 10, 11

          and 13, it transpires that all the five accused persons, including

          the petitioner, were present. Though the firing was made by

          Ram Janam Sahani, the petitioner was also a member of the

          mob.

                       6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the

          present case, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail

          to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of

          the petitioner is hereby rejected.
          Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20225 of 2026(3) dt.07-05-2026
                                                      3/3




                                 7. Liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that if he

                    surrenders within six weeks, the Trial Court is directed to pass

                    order on his surrender-cum-bail application on the same day

                    without being prejudiced by the fact that the anticipatory bail

                    application of the petitioner has been rejected by this Court, and

                    the Trial Court shall pass an order on the merits of the case.



                                                                    (Dr. Anshuman, J.)

Aman Kumar/-

U     T

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…