Dilip Sahani @ Dilip Kumar Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

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 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