Nantun Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.7875 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2024 Thana- BOCHAHAN District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

Nantun Sahni Son of Kailash Sahni Resident of Village - Ram Das Majhauli, Police Station - Bochahan, District - Muzaffarpur 2.

Sima Devi Wife of Nantun Sahni Resident of Village - Ram Das Majhauli, Police Station - Bochahan, District - Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioners :

Mr. Sanjay Kumar S.K., Advocate For the State :

Mr. Pranav Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-02-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, apprehending their arrest, in connection with Bochahan P.S. Case No. 172 of 2024 dated 25.07.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 191(2), 191(3), 190, 126(2), 115(2), 118(1), 109, 132, 352, 351(2) & 351 (3) of BNS Act, 2023.

3. As per allegation, when the Police team reached the home of Sangita Devi, the Police personnel were assaulted by about 15-20 persons and thereafter, the accused persons fled away. As per inquiry, the names of the petitioners have been

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7875 of 2025(2) dt.07-02-2025 2/3 taken by Chowkidar. He further submits that similarly situated co-accused have been enlarged on anticipatory bail by this court vide order dated 11.12.2024 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.84431 of 2024.

4. Learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that there is no way involvement of the petitioners in the alleged offence. Their names have been taken only on the basis of suspicion. They were not present on the place of occurrence and, hence, there is no question of committing the alleged offence.

5. It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioners have not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.

6. It has further been stated in paragraph no.3 of the bail petition that the petitioners have got clean antecedents.

7. Learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioners for bail.

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this petition is allowed, directing the petitioners above-named, to be enlarged on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of eight weeks from the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.7875 of 2025(2) dt.07-02-2025 3/3 date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.10,000 /- (Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M 14 (East), Muzaffarpur, in connection with Bochahan P.S. Case No. 172 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.PC. and on the following conditions:

(i) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners after hearing them and getting satisfied that the petitioners have concealed their criminal antecedents despite their knowledge of the same.

(ii) In case, it is brought to the notice of the court below that statement regarding previous bail petition is wrong, learned court below shall cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners.

(Jitendra Kumar, J.) Chandan/- U T