Jitendra Sahani @ Jitendra Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42749 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-567 Year-2022 Thana- BOCHAHAN District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== JITENDRA SAHANI @ JITENDRA SAHNI son of Ramnandan Sahani village- Ramdas Majhauli Bhatta Tola Ps- Bochahan Dist- Muzaffarpur ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arvind Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 11-08-2023

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 324, 323, 307, 379, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and the informant alleges that on 25.12.2022, when he alongwith his family was coming home by an auto they were intercepted by two named accused persons including the petitioner alongwith two unknown, thereafter, it is alleged that the named accused persons assaulted him with knife causing injury on his hand and abdomen and thereafter assaulted his wife by knife causing injury on her neck and looted Rs. 7,000/- and one gold chain.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that petitioner is co-villager of the informant and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42749 of 2023(2) dt.11-08-2023 2/2 are having dispute relating to land on account of which the present false case came to be instituted. It is also submitted that even presuming what has been alleged is true without admitting, then the injury suffered by the injured is simple in nature.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submits that no doubt the injury suffered by the injured is simple in nature but then the knife injury was on vital part of the body i.e., on the abdomen of the informant and on neck of his wife, it is also submitted that it appears that God saved the informant and informant's wife or else they would have been killed, since injury was caused on the vital part of the body by a sharp edge weapon i.e., knife.

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned APP for the State, the Court is not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

7. Hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Adnan/- U T