Patna High CourtCR. MISC./26286/2026rejected

Raghunath Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

2026-04-20Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.26286 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-43 Year-2024 Thana- SONBERSA District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Raghunath Sahni Son of Lakhan Sahni Resident of Village- Dalkawa, P.S.- Sonbersa, District- Sitamrhi ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 20-04-2026 Heard Mr. Uday Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Manoj Kumar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail who is in custody since 19.09.2024 in connection with Sessions Trial No. 473 of 2025 arising out of Sonbersa P.S. Case No. 43 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 31.01.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 14.05.2025 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 9419 of 2025 by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.26286 of 2026(2) dt.20-04-2026 2/2 FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from perusal of the FIR it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner supported by the medical evidence and on the same ground earlier the bail application of the petitioner was rejected by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 473 of 2025 arising out of Sonbersa P.S. Case No. 43 of 2024 pending in the court of learned District & Additional Sessions Judge 9th, Sitamarhi, District- Sitamarhi.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Vanisha/- U T