Patna High Court
Sohan Sahani @ Sanal Kumar SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SOURENDRA PANDEY
Holding
Anticipatory bail was denied to the petitioner.
Summary
The petitioner, Sohan Sahani (also identified as Sonal Kumar Sahani), was implicated in a 2021 FIR alleging offences under Sections 399, 402, 414 of the IPC and Sections 25(1‑b)a, 26, 35 of the Arms Act, based on a co‑accused’s statement. He applied for anticipatory bail, claiming mistaken identity and noting that no incriminating article was recovered from his residence, though he has two prior criminal antecedents. The State opposed the bail, emphasizing the petitioner’s naming by an apprehended co‑accused and the lapse of over five years since the FIR. Justice Sourendra Pandey examined the facts and concluded that anticipatory bail could not be granted under the circumstances. The court rejected the anticipatory bail application but indicated that the petitioner could seek regular bail upon surrender without prejudice.
Issues considered
- Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to an accused named by a co‑accused after a lapse of five years.
- Whether the petitioner’s prior criminal antecedents and lack of material evidence from his house preclude anticipatory bail.
Legislation cited
- Arms Act — s. 25(1-b)a, 26, 35
- Indian Penal Code — s. 399, 402, 414
Subjects
- anticipatory bail
- bail jurisprudence
- Indian Penal Code
- Arms Act
- robbery
- dacoity
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.25587 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2021 Thana- LALGANJ District- Vaishali
======================================================
Sohan Sahani @ Sonal Kumar Sahani S/o- Ganesh Sahani Resident of
Village- Ismailpur PS- Hajipur Sadar, Dist- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Chandra Shekhar Sharma, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Md. Aslam Ansari, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY
ORAL ORDER
3 17-06-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in
connection with Lalganj P.S. Case No. 155 of 2021 registered
for the offence under Sections 399, 402 and 414 of the Indian
Penal Code and under Sections 25(1-b)a, 26 and 35 of the Arms
Act.
3. As per the FIR, it is alleged that the police saw one
person coming on motor-cycle, who upon seeing the police tried
to flee away. However, he was apprehended and disclosed
himself as Raja Kumar and on search, police recovered a loaded
country made pistol alongwith a live cartridges. It is further
disclosed that he was going to give the pistol to one Shashikant
Rai to commit loot in the bank and thereafter, he had named the
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25587 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
2/3
other accused persons including the petitioner to be in touch
with the said Shashikant Rai, who had planned to commit the
loot.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
the petitioner has falsely been implicated and it is only on the
disclosure made by the apprehended accused that his name has
surfaced. It is further submitted that the petitioner is known as
Sohan Sahni and is a resident of village Ismailpur, while the FIR
was lodged against the person, namely Sonal Kumar Sahni and
his address was stated to be village Harauli. It has lastly been
submitted that no incriminating article has been recovered from
his house and it is merely on suspicion that the petitioner has
been named as accused. It has lastly been submitted that the
petitioner has two criminal antecedent.
5. The learned APP for the State has vehemently
opposed the prayer for the bail and has stated that the petitioner
has approached this Court after lapse of almost more than five
years as the FIR was lodged in the year 2021. It has been
submitted that the petitioner is named by an apprehended co-
accused and therefore, the petitioner may not be granted liberty
of anticipatory bail as the other two co-accused persons were
granted regular bail by this Court, that too way-back in the year
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.25587 of 2026(3) dt.17-06-2026
3/3
2022.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,
I am not inclined to grant the liberty of anticipatory bail to the
petitioner.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail is
rejected.
8. However, it is made clear that if the petitioner
willingly surrenders and pray for regular bail, the same shall be
heard on its merits without being prejudiced by rejection of the
present bail application and if possible, the order shall be passed
on the same day.
(Sourendra Pandey, J)
Tannu-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.