Patna High CourtCR. MISC./74079/2024rejected

Jaymangal Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

2025-07-23Mr. Justice Rajesh Kumar Verma3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.74079 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-12 Year-2024 Thana- TURKI KHARARU District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Jaymangal Sahni son of Bangar Sahni Resident of Village -chhajan Manariya, Ps- Turki, Dist- 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. Madhura Nand Jha, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-07-2025 Heard Mr. Raju Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Madhura Nand Jha, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Turki P.S. Case No. 12 of 2024, F.I.R. dated 05.03.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 307, 379, 427, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. According to prosecution case, on 18.02.2024 at around 2:30 P.M., the informant, who is involved in business of Fish Jeera maintenance and sales, was returning home after selling Fish Jeera. On the way, he was surrounded by accused persons. The accused abused the informant and when he objected, Langar Sahni ordered to kill him. Sanjay Sahni allegedly snatched Rs. 35,000/- from the informant and handed

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74079 of 2024(3) dt.23-07-2025 2/3 it to Bhola Sahni. Rajesh Sahni took a gold Hanuman pendant from his neck. When the informant's wife tried to intervene, Dharmsheela Devi snatched her mangalsutra. The informant's brother also tried to intervene, but the petitioner allegedly snatched Rs. 26,000/- from him. Villagers rescued the informant and got him admitted to RDJM hospital.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. The allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R.. As per allegation in the F.I.R., the petitioner has assaulted to the informant and he has received injury, apart from that there is case and counter case.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, on the basis of material available on record and case diary, has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that from a bare perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner that he has assaulted to the informant by means of iron rod and he has received injury and injury report of the informant suggests that the injury is grievous and fatal in nature.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.74079 of 2024(3) dt.23-07-2025 3/3

6. Considering the aforesaid fact that there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner and injury inflicted upon the injured person is grievous in nature, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Turki P.S. Case No. 12 of 2024 pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M.-1 (West), Muzaffarpur.

7. Prayer is refused.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Neha/- U T