Patna High Court
Dhannu PaswanversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- REJECTED
- Bench
- KHATIM REZA
Holding
Bail was denied to the petitioner at this stage.
Summary
The petitioner, Dhannu Paswan, applied for bail in a case dating back to 1987 involving alleged dacoity and related offences under Sections 396 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution alleged that a group of armed criminals entered the informant’s house, committed dacoity, and later threw a bomb causing death. The petitioner argued he was not named in the FIR, had no knowledge of the case, lived outside the state, and only surrendered after being arrested in 2025. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the four‑decade delay and the petitioner’s alleged evasion of the law. The High Court, after considering the facts and submissions, refused bail, directing the trial court to expedite the trial within three months and allowing the petitioner to renew the bail plea if the trial is not concluded within that period.
Issues considered
- Whether bail can be granted to an accused in a case of dacoity and related offences when the investigation and trial have spanned nearly four decades.
- Whether the petitioner’s claim of not being named in the FIR and lack of knowledge of the case warrants bail.
- Whether the petitioner’s alleged evasion of the legal process for about forty years precludes the grant of bail.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 396, 412
Subjects
- bail
- dacoity
- Indian Penal Code
- long delay in trial
- high court
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3981 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-28 Year-1987 Thana- ATHMALGOLA District- Patna
======================================================
Dhannu Paswan, aged about 65 years, Male, Son of Late Ram Lakhan
Paswan, resident of Village- Barah Old, P.S.- Harnaut (Kalyan Bigha),
District- Nalanda.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Kumari Pallavi, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KHATIM REZA
ORAL ORDER
4 24-02-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with
Athmalgola PS Case No.28 of 1987 dated 26.01.1987, instituted
for the offence punishable under Sections 396, 412 of the Indian
Penal Code.
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on the alleged
date of occurrence when the informant was sleeping in his
room, 7-8 criminals having pistols and rifles in their hands
entered in his room and committed dacoity. Thereafter, the
miscreants also committed dacoity in the house of the brother of
the informant. It is further alleged that they were 20-25 in
numbers. When the villagers chased the miscreants, they threw
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3981 of 2026(4) dt.24-02-2026
2/3
bomb on the villagers due to which one villager sustained bomb
injury and died.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner is not named in the FIR. The petitioner had no
knowledge about the present case and he use to reside out of the
State to earn his livelihood. During the investigation or after
investigation, the petitioner did not surrender because he was
not aware about the same and only on 20.06.2025, the petitioner
was arrested and sent to judicial custody. The trial against other
two accused persons, namely, Kauleshwar Paswan and Mannu
Paswan, has concluded in Sessions Trial No.226 of 1988 and
they have been acquitted on 25.11.2010 by the 3rd Additional
Sessions Judge, Patna.
5. Learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail.
Learned APP submits that it is a case of the year 1987 and the
petitioner evaded the process of law for about four decades and
he does not deserve bail especially on account of his conduct.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of
the case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am
not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage.
7. Accordingly, prayer of the petitioner for grant of
bail is rejected at this stage.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3981 of 2026(4) dt.24-02-2026
3/3
8. The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the
trial and conclude the same as early as possible, preferably,
within a period of three months from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order even by fixing the
case on day to day basis if necessary.
9. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew the
prayer for bail if the trial is not concluded within the stipulated
period.
10. The application stands dismissed with the
aforesaid direction/observation.
(Khatim Reza, J)
J. Alam/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.