Patna High Court
Dilip Sahani @ Dilip Kumar SahaniversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- BAIL REJECTED
- Bench
- SATYAVRAT VERMA
Holding
The Court held that bail could not be granted in view of the seriousness of the offences, the presence of explosives, and the petitioner’s extensive criminal antecedents.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilip Sahani, was arrested in 2018 for alleged participation in a gathering where explosives were found, leading to charges under IPC sections 147, 148, 149, 414 and Explosive Substances Act sections 4 and 5. He has nine prior criminal cases, including a conviction for a serious offence that resulted in a life sentence. The petitioner sought regular bail, arguing that he had cooperated with police by naming accomplices. The State opposed bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the offences, the presence of detonators in his possession, and his extensive criminal antecedents. After considering the gravity of the charges and the risk of further terrorism-related activity, the Court declined to grant bail, rejecting the petitioner's prayer.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate bail jurisprudence when the accused is charged with serious offences under the IPC and the Explosive Substances Act and has multiple prior convictions, including a life sentence?
Legislation cited
- Explosive Substances Act — s. 4, 5
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 148, 149, 414
Subjects
- bail
- Indian Penal Code
- Explosive Substances Act
- serious offences
- antecedent
- life imprisonment
- criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8062 of 2026
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-345 Year-2018 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Dilip Sahani @ Dilip Kumar Sahani Son of Late Shivnandan Sahni Resident
of Village- Kajipur Thathan Ps -Hajipur Sadar, Dist- Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vasant Vikas, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, A.P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA
ORAL ORDER
2 23-04-2026 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
A.P.P. for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the
offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 414 of the
Indian Penal Code as well as Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive
Substance Act.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner
submits that petitioner has antecedent of nine cases and is in custody
since 03.06.2018. It is next submitted that informant alleges that he
received an information that petitioner and his associates had
assembled near a village and they may commit some crime,
accordingly, the informant reached the place of occurrence when the
accused persons, on seeing the police, started fleeing but petitioner
was apprehended and on search printed purcha, five detonators and a
motorcycle was recovered and petitioner disclosed the name of the
persons who managed to escape. Further, the petitioner also disclosed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8062 of 2026(2) dt.23-04-2026
2/2
that in the meeting, Mantu Paswan was also present and plan was
being hatched for realizing levy and spreading terror by way of
blasting explosive substance.
4. On query of the Court with regard to the other cases,
the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner fairly
submits petitioner stands convicted in one of the cases and has been
sentenced to undergo life imprisonment.
5. At this stage, learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently
opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner submits that
petitioner not only has antecedent of nine cases but then all nine
cases relate to serious offences including CLA Act, UAP Act and
302 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted that petitioner
was apprehended from the spot and from his possession detonators
were recovered which amply demonstrates the intent.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, the
Court is not inclined to release the petitioner on bail in connection
with Hajipur Sadar P.S. Case No. 345 of 2018 pending in the Court
of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur/Successor
Court.
7. Hence, the prayer for bail is rejected.
(Satyavrat Verma, J)
Kundan/-
U T
Checking your session…