Nawal Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.15314 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-398 Year-2024 Thana- VAISHALI District- Vaishali ====================================================== 1.

Nawal Sahni S/O Dashai Sahni R/O Vill.- Nagwan, P.O.- Chkwaja Nagwan, Chakwa urf Chak Khodaiya, Chakwaja Nagma,P.S- Lalganj, Dist.- Vaishali, Bihar, Pin- 844120 2.

Pavitri Devi @ Kabutri Devi W/O Nawal Sahni R/O Vill.- Nagwan, P.O.- Chkwaja Nagwan, Chakwa urf Chak Khodaiya, Chakwaja Nagma,P.SLalganj, Dist.- Vaishali, Bihar, Pin- 844120 3.

Chotu Kumar S/O Nawal Sahni R/O Vill.- Nagwan, P.O.- Chkwaja Nagwan, Chakwa urf Chak Khodaiya, Chakwaja Nagma,P.S- Lalgnaj, Dist.- Vaishali, Bihar, Pin- 844120 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Ranjan Kumar S/O Late Govind Sahni R/O Vill./PO- Raghunathpur, P.S.- Paru, Dist.- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Venkatesh Kirti, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 16-06-2025 Heard Mr. Venkatesh Kirti, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Uma Shankar Prasad Singh, learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner are apprehending their arrest in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 398 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 05.10.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 80, 238, 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023.

3. According to prosecution case, the informant alleged that the petitioners along with other accused person committed murder of his sister, namely, Soni Kumari (now,deceased).

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.15314 of 2025(4) dt.16-06-2025 2/2

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners have clean antecedent and they have falsely been implicated in the present case merely on the ground that they are in-laws of the deceased. Petitioner no.1 is father-in-law, petitioner no.2 is mother-in-law and petitioner no.3 is brother-in-law of the deceased. He furthers submits that the informant is not the eye witness of the present crime in question.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the basis of materials available on record and case diary has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioners and submits that it has come during investigation that the petitioners along with other persons have disposed of the dead body of the deceased without informing the family members of the deceased or the police.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in connection with Vaishali P.S. Case No. 398 of 2024 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Vaishali at Hajipur.

7. Prayer is refused.

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