Vinod Sahni @ Vinod Sahani v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8486 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-353 Year-2023 Thana- PARIHAR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Vinod Sahni @ Vinod Sahani S/o Mahesh Sahani @ Maheshi Sahni R/o vill - Malha Tol, P.S. - Bela, Distt.- Sitamarhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Uday Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Upendra Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 14-05-2025
1. Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Parihar P.S. Case No. 353 / 2023 dt: 13.12.2023 registered for the offence u/s 392 of the I.P.C.
3. As per the F.I.R. on 12.12.2023 at about 07:30 P.M. when the informant reached in front of Honda Agency, Parihar by his motorcycle, three unidentified miscreants who were riding over a Apache motorcycle caught the informant and pulled him down on the road from the motorcycle and on point of pistol the miscreants snatched the bag of the informant containing Rs. 1,64,000/- and other goods like I.D. Card, Charger etc. and fled away towards Parihar. The informant has collected the aforesaid cash against loan for his L&T Company.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8486 of 2025(5) dt.14-05-2025 2/2 has not committed any offence in the manner alleged and he has falsely been involved in the present case only on the basis of suspicion. The F.I.R. has been lodged against unknown. The petitioner is neither named in the F.I.R. nor the informant has divulged the name of the petitioner in the restatement. During course of investigation the name of petitioner has surfaced in the confessional statement of the co-accused / Rishu Kumar. No looted article and / or stolen property has been recovered from the conscious possession and / or premises of the petitioner.
5. Regard being had to the submission made by the parties, taking in to consideration the fact that it is a case of road robbery in the night and the petitioner has four criminal antecedent, accordingly, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is rejected. (Anil Kumar Sinha, J) praful/- U T