Virendra Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11108 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-569 Year-2022 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Virendra Sahani Son of Nand Lal Sahani R/o Village Dharpur P.S. Minapur, District Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Mohit Agarwal, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Jagdhar Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 22-02-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Minapur P.S. Case No.569 of 2022 lodged under Sections 147, 149, 323, 341, 379, 506 and 302 of the I.P.C.

3. As per the prosecution case, the F.I.R. has been lodged against nine named accused persons including the petitioner against whom there is allegation that he has assaulted the victim which subsequently resulted into his death.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. He submits that from the F.I.R., it is very much clear that the dispute is relating to land due to which occurrence took place. He also submits that the informant and accused both are well-known to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11108 of 2024(2) dt.22-02-2024 2/2 each other and they are relatives and residing in the same village

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in custody since 01.12.2023 having clean antecedent. He submits that charge-sheet has already been filed in this case.

6. Counsel also submits that the other co-accused has been granted anticipatory bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide Annexure-P/2 and P/3 of the bail petition.

7. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the petitioner is not only order giver rather he has actively participated though he has made lathi blow on the deceased, but death has been caused by the said lathi blow at the hand of the petitioner and others.

8. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected but liberty is hereby granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail 9 months after framing of charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J.) Prakashmani/- U T