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

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20978 of 2016 (3) dt.30-06-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.20978 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -10 Year- 2016 Thana -GOPALPUR District- BHAGALPUR ======================================================

1. Amol Sahni @ Amol Kumar Sahni Son of Gopal Sahni, Resident of Village- Sadhua, P.S. Rangra (Gopalpur), District- Bhagalpur... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Hirday Pd. Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 30-06-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Gopalpur (Rangra) P.S. Case No. 10 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, the petitioner and other FIR named co-accused took drink with the deceased brother of the informant and thereafter, his dead body was recovered buried in a ditch. Submission is of false implication and that there is no legal and tangible material against the petitioner, no eye witness has come forward to say regarding the hand of the petitioner in the killing, the Police has got recorded the confessional statement of the petitioner forcibly and recovery of four empty bottles and spade are not relevant and as such the petitioner deserves

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.20978 of 2016 (3) dt.30-06-2016 sympathetic consideration to which the learned APP opposes by submitting that from call details report of mobile of the deceased and further from the statement of the informant and witnesses it reveals that the petitioner was with the deceased brother at the time of his murder and further on the basis of confessional statement of the petitioner spade used for digging the earth and empty bottles of wine were recovered.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the aforesaid materials, at present, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after remaining one year in custody.

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