Patna High CourtCR. MISC./20082/2026dismissed

Raju Sahni @ Langra v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-01Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.20082 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2011 Thana- PANAPUR District- Saran ====================================================== 1.

Raju Sahni @ Langra S/o Harihar Sahni R/o vill- Basahiya, PS- Panapur, District- Saran, Chapra 2.

Harihar Sahni S/o Late Hawaldar Sahani R/o vill- Basahiya, PS- Panapur, District- Saran, Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr. Sunil Prasad Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 01-04-2026 Heard, Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioners seeks bail in connection Sessions Trial No. 968/2025 (arising out of Panapur P.S. Case No. 08/2011) dated 03.02.2011 for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 341, 342, 427, 380, 436 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act, Sections 3 and 4 of the Explosive Substance Act and Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 03.02.2011 the informant and her daughter-in-law and other family members were having dinner, in the meantime, some miscreants with

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.20082 of 2026(2) dt.01-04-2026 2/2 deadly weapon arrived at her home. The miscreants threatened to demolish the house of the informant with explosive. Thereafter, they entered the house and started misbehaving with the house members and started damaging various objects of the house.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. The petitioner no. 1 is in custody since 17.06.2025 and the petitioner no. 2 is in custody since 23.07.2025 and have two criminal antecedents. The petitioners are not named in the FIR. The name of the petitioners have come in the confessional statement of the co-accused. The petitioner are absconder in a case of 2011.

5. Considering the materials available on the record and the fact that the petitioners are absconder, this application is dismissed.

(Sandeep Kumar, J) atul/- U T