Sanjay Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2392 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-432 Year-2017 Thana- MOTIPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== SANJAY SAHANI son of late Asharfi Sahani Resident of Village- Bathana, P.S.- Motipur, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raju Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 24-06-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State through virtual Court proceedings. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The daughter of the informant is said to have been killed by the petitioner in association of his family members. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is not specific rather general and omnibus in nature. The petitioner has no criminal antecedent and has been languishing in custody since 24.11.2017.

Mr. Humayou Ahmad Khan, learned APP for the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2392 of 2021(6) dt.24-06-2021 2/2 State vehemently opposing the bail petition submitted that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of killing his wife. Hence, he does not deserve bail.

Vide order dated 12.04.2021, a report was called for from the concerned Court regarding the stage of the trial. In compliance thereof, the concerned Court has sent the report, which is at 'Flag R', in which, apart from the other fact, it is stated that the seven witnesses are yet to be examined and the trial may be concluded within one year.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The prayer for bail is hereby rejected.

However, the learned Trial Court is directed to conclude the trial as expeditiously as possible preferably within one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Both the parties are expected to extend their full cooperation in early conclusion of the trial. If the trial is not concluded within one year, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Trivedi/- U T