Patna High CourtCR. MISC./72446/2024bail rejected

Manjay Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

2024-12-04Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72446 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-142 Year-2021 Thana- BALIGAON District- Vaishali ====================================================== Manjay Sahni Son of Vijay Sahni Village- Bujurg Pindautta, P.S. Tisiaouta, Dist.- Vaishali, Bihar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Dr. Indiwar Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 04-12-2024 Heard Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Baligaon P.S. Case No. 142 of 2021, lodged on 16.12.2021, for the offences punishable under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution, the FIR has been lodged against four unknown accused persons against whom there is an allegation that they have snatched Rs. 1,19,483/-, one Samsung Tab and Bio-metric machine from the informant.

4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. Counsel submits that the petitioner's name has figured in this case by virtue of confessional statement of the co-accused. Counsel

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72446 of 2024(2) dt.04-12-2024 2/2 further submits that the petitioner has not been put on Test Identification Parade till date. Counsel further submits that four co-accused persons have already been granted bail by this Court as well as by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court which is annexed as Annexure- P/2 series and this aspect may be taken into consideration.

5. Learned APP for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the criminal antecedent of the petitioner is not clean. The petitioner has six criminal antecedents and he is on bail in all cases.

6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Therefore, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby rejected with liberty granted to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail one year after framing of charge.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Aman Kumar/- U T