Sagar Sahni @ Ram Sagar Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.36559 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-78 Year-2019 Thana- PIYAR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.

Sagar Sahni @ Ram Sagar Sahni Son Of Late Anurag Sahni R/O VillageTepari, P.S.- Piar (Hattha O.P.), District- Muzaffarpur 2.

Deepak Sahni S/O Sagar Sahni @ Ram Sagar Sahni R/O Village- Tepari, P.S.- Piar (Hattha O.P.), District- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Chandra Shekhar Anand For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Anita Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 14-11-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 366(A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Petitioners are said to have kidnapped the daughter of the informant for the purpose of marriage.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. He submits that there is general and omnibus allegation levelled against the petitioners. He submits that there is no specific overt act against the petitioners. He submits that occurred took place on 28.03.2019 but the FIR has been lodged

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.36559 of 2022(4) dt.14-11-2022 2/2 on 14.04.2019 without explaining any reasonable cause of delay. He submits that the informant and his wife were very cunning and want to marry her daughter with co-accused Gori Sahni, who is nephew of the petitioner no. 1 which was not liked by the petitioners. He further submits that petitioners have no criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of this application. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that all the FIR named accused persons including these petitioners have kidnapped the daughter of the informant. He has further submitted that the victim girl has not been recovered till date.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected in connection with Piar (Hattha O.P.) P.S. Case No. 78 of 2019. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) devendra/- U T