Amol Sahni @ Amol Kumar Sahni @ Amal Kumar Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8566 of 2017 (2) dt.01-03-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.8566 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -10 Year- 2016 Thana -GOPALPUR District- BHAGALPUR ====================================================== AMOL SAHNI @ AMOL KUMAR SAHNI @ AMAL KUMAR SAHNI, Son of Gopal Kumar Sahni, Resident of Village- Sadhuwa (Nawtoliya), Police Station- Gopalpur (Rangra) in the District of Bhagalpur. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sushant Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Shailendra Kumar -2 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 01-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner wants to renew his prayer of bail, which was earlier rejected vide order dated 30.06.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 20978 of 2016, on the ground that the petitioner is in custody since 18.01.2016, there is no direct evidence against the petitioner and circumstances are not enough to indicate that the petitioner is the assailant. The petitioner was given liberty to renew his prayer of bail after remaining one year in custody and as such he deserves sympathetic consideration.

Learned APP fairly submits that in view of earlier observation now the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, the petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8566 of 2017 (2) dt.01-03-2017 above named is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge II, Naugachia in S. T. No. 362 of 2016 arising out of Gopalpur (Rangra) P.S. Case No. 10 of 2016, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T