Nanhak Sahni @ Raj Kumar Sahani v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28638 of 2026 In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30558 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2024 Thana- Pahelja P.S. District- Saran ====================================================== Nanhak Sahni @ Raj Kumar sahani son of Ram Dayal Sahani Resident of Khaika Police Station -Sonepur, Dist- Saran At Chapra ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Narendra Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 01-05-2026 Heard Mr. Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey, learned APP for the State.
2. The present modification application has been filed for modify the order dated 14.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 30558 of 2025.
3. By the order dated 14.05.2025, the petitioner was granted bail with the following conditions :- "(i) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and on his absence on two consecutive
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28638 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026 2/3 dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.
(ii). If the petitioner tamper with the evidence or the witness, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.
(iii) And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedents, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification".
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to communication gap on the basis of the information furnished by the Pairvikar, it was stated in paragraph-3 of the bail petition that the petitioner has three criminal antecedents but in fact the petitioner carries four criminal antecedents. The Court also noticed Section 362 of Cr.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28638 of 2026(2) dt.01-05-2026 3/3 P.C./Section 403 of BNSS, which reads as follows :- "362/403- Court not to alter judgment. Save as otherwise provided by this Code/Sanhita or by any other law for the time being in force, no Court, when it has signed its judgment or final order disposing of a case, shall alter or review the same except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error."
5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the instant modification petition is dismissed.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U