Munna Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14020 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-436 Year-2020 Thana- SARAIYA District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== MUNNA SAHNI Son of Nagina Sahni Resident of Village- Ajijpur, P.S.- Saraiya, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Madan Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL ORDER 04-08-2021 Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.

The petitioner has preferred this application for grant of regular bail in connection with Saraiya P.S. Case no. 436 of 2020 registered under sections 302 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per allegation in the F.I.R, over a dispute as to why the son of the informant had provided the telephone number of a girl of the house of the accused, it is stated that the accused persons including the petitioner herein assaulted the informant and the members of his family leading to the death of his father.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegations as levelled in the F.I.R are false and concocted.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14020 of 2021(3) dt.04-08-2021 2/2 The manner of occurrence is other than what has been narrated in the F.I.R. The petitioner has been falsely implicated due to oblique reasons. There is no explanation for the delay in lodging of the F.I.R. The petitioner is in custody since 7.9.2020 and has no criminal antecedent.

Heard learned A.P.P. for the State.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the allegation of assault as levelled in the F.I.R leading to the death of the informant's father, the Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and the application is rejected.

However in the facts and circumstances of the case liberty is granted to the petitioner to renew his prayer for bail after six months.

(Partha Sarthy, J) Prakash/- U