Ravi Sahni v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31867 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-267 Year-2024 Thana- JANDAHA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Ravi Sahni S/o Baidhnath Sahni R/o Village- Yadunandanpur, PS- Jandaha, Mahisaur, District- Vaishali at Hajipur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Mritunjay Kumar Nirala, A.P.P.
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL ORDER 20-05-2025 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Jandaha (Mahisaur) P.S. Case No. 267 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Section 309(4) of B.N.S.,2023 corresponding to section 392 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner has four criminal antecedent.
3. The prosecution case is to the effect that the informant who was a delivery boy of Flipkart Company was intercepted by four miscreants and it is alleged that informant was robbed of Rs. 12,000/- and the mobile phone and subsequently they fled away.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits
2/4 that the petitioner has falsely been implicated merely because he has criminal antecedents and he was arrested in Patepur P.S. Case No. 286 of 2024 and thereafter was remanded in the present case and barring his confessional statement in the present case there is nothing to connect the petitioner with the occurrence. It has further been stated that no incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner and till date the petitioner has not been put on T.I.P. for identification of the involvement of the petitioner in the present case. The learned counsel has lastly been submitted that the petitioner is in custody in the present case since 20.01.2025.
5. The learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has stated that the petitioner is an accused of similar nature of offences and carries four criminal cases against his name and hence should not be released on bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid submissions made by the respective parties and taking into account that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and his name has subsequently come on the confessional statement when he was arrested in another case and no incriminating article has
3/4 been recovered, I am inclined to grant the petitioner privilege of regular bail.
7. Accordingly, the prayer for bail is allowed.
8. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Jandaha (Mahisaur) P.S. Case No. 267 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:- (i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be his close relative.
(ii) The petitioner shall remain physically present in Court on each date of the trial.
(iii) In case of absence on two consecutive dates, or in violation of the terms of the bail and if the prosecution is found involvement of the petitioner in similar nature of offence, the bail bond of the petitioner will be liable to be cancelled by the Court concerned.
(iv) And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for
4/4 cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.
(Sourendra Pandey, J) Siwani/- U T