Dinesh Sahani @ Dinesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.30106 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-351 Year-2018 Thana- KANTI District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Dinesh Sahani @ Dinesh Kumar S/o Gulichan Sahni R/O Village- Kalwari Fatehpur, P.S- Kanti, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Yugal Kishore, Advocate For the State :

Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 07-05-2026 Heard Mr. Yugal Kishore, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Uday Pratap Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner seeks bail, who is in custody since 04.01.2025, in connection with Sessions Trial Case No. 707 of 2025 arising out of Kanti P.S. Case No. 351 of 2018, F.I.R. dated 18.06.2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354, 366A, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Earlier the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 02.05.2025 in Cr. Misc. No. 22848 of 2025 and before the aforesaid case, the petitioner approached this Hon'ble Court for grant of anticipatory bail in Cr. Misc. No. 69525 of 2018 but the same was dismissed vide order dated

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30106 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 2/3 21.01.2019 with the liberty to the petitioner to surrender before the learned Trial court within four weeks but the petitioner has not chosen to surrender before the learned Trial court and he has been absconding about 07 years and when the process under Section 82/83 of the Cr. P.C. started then the petitioner surrendered before the learned Trial Court.

4. Learned APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C./183 of the B.N.S.S. in which she has categorically stated that the petitioner has committed rape upon her and apart from that the petitioner had sold the victim in the State of Uttar Pradesh and the date of birth of the victim suggests that on the date of of occurrence, the victim girl was minor.

5. Considering the nature of allegation in the F.I.R. supported by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of the Cr. P.C./183 of the B.N.S.S. and taking into account earlier the bail petition of the petitioner was rejected as well as petitioner has also not made a fresh ground, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Sessions Trial Case No. 707 of 2025 arising out of Kanti P.S. Case No. 351 of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.30106 of 2026(2) dt.07-05-2026 3/3 2018 pending in the Court of learned Exclusive Special Court to deal with cases under the Rape & POCSO Act, Muzaffarpur.

6. Prayer is refused.

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