Patna High Court
Hani RajversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- SANDEEP KUMAR
Holding
The court held that bail cannot be granted in a dacoity case under Section 395 IPC where the accused has admitted guilt, the offence is grave, and the trial has already begun.
Summary
The petitioners, Md Aftab Alam and Hani Raj, were charged under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code for a dacoity in which Rs.3,00,000 was looted from Bandhan Bank, Motihari. Both have been in custody since April 2024 and have made self‑incriminating statements admitting participation. Their earlier bail applications were rejected on 23‑Oct‑2024 and 11‑Sep‑2024, and the charges have now been framed with the trial already underway. On a second attempt for regular bail, the court again refused, emphasizing the seriousness of the offence, the admission of guilt, and the commencement of trial. The court directed the Superintendent of Police to ensure witness attendance to avoid trial delay and ordered the dismissal of the bail applications.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to accused persons in a dacoity case under Section 395 IPC after the charge has been framed and trial commenced
- Whether a self‑incriminating statement by the accused precludes the grant of regular bail
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 395
Subjects
- bail
- dacoity
- Section 395 IPC
- Criminal Procedure Code
- self‑incriminating statement
- trial commencement
- East Champaran
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55507 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-425 Year-2023 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Md. Aftab Alam @ Md Aftab Ali S/O Md. Hamid R/O Village- Parsauniya,
P.O and P.S- Baruraj, Distt.- Muzaffarpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 39074 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-425 Year-2023 Thana- SUGAULI District- East Champaran
======================================================
Hani Raj Son of Lakhindra Sah R/O Vill- Thikha Kothi, P.S.- Kathaiya,
District- Muzaffarpur
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Patna
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 55507 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Santosh Kumar
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhayay, APP
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 39074 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Dhananjay Kumar Tiwary
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Ashok Kumar Singh
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
3 10-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the
petitioners for grant of bail in connection with Sugauli P.S.Case
No. 425 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under
Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55507 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
2/3
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioners have
been rejected vide order dated 23.10.2024 and 11.09.2024
passed in Cr. Misc. No.75381 of 2024 and Cr. Misc. No. 60727
of 2024 which reads as under:-
Heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in
connection with Sugauli P.S.Case No.425
of 2023 registered for the offence
punishable under section 395 of the Indian
Penal Code.
3.Unknown criminals committed
a dacoity in Bandhan Bank, Motihari and
looted more than Rs. 3,00,000/-. The
petitioner is in custody since 18.04.2024.
4. The name of the petitioner has
come during investigation. The petitioner
has made a self -inclupatory statement and
said that he has participated in the crime.
He is also involved in another case of
dacoity.
5. Considering the aforesaid
facts, I am not inclined to grant the
petitioner privilege of regular bail.
6. Accordingly, this application
is dismissed.”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that
the charge has been framed.
5. Considering the gravity of the offence and the fact
that the trial has started, I am not inclined to review my earlier
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.55507 of 2025(3) dt.10-02-2026
3/3
order.
6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
7. The Superintendent of Police, Motihari, East
Champaran is directed to ensure the appearance of the witnesses
in the trial so that the trial is not delayed.
8. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the
Superintendent of Police, Motihari, East Champaran forthwith
through FAX or e-mail for its compliance.
(Sandeep Kumar, J)
N.K/-
U T
Checking your session…