Bhogendra Sahni @ Yogendra Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72707 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-25 Year-2019 Thana- ARER District- Madhubani ====================================================== 1.

BHOGENDRA SAHNI @ YOGENDRA SAHNI Son of Baudhu Sahni Resident of Village - Balain, P.S.- Arer, Distt - Madhubani. 2.

Pappu Sahni @ Pappu Kumar Sahni Son of Sanichar Sahni Resident of Village - Balain, P.S.- Arer, Distt - Madhubani. 3.

Akhilesh Sahni Son of Choudhary Sahni Resident of Village - Balain, P.S.- Arer, Distt - Madhubani.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Gagan Deo Yadav For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Shyameshwar Dayal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-11-2019 Petitioners seek bail in anticipation of their arrest in connection with Arer P.S. Case No. 25 of 2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per F.I.R petitioners and other accused persons started assaulting the informant and his brother by sharp cutting weapon and thereafter there is allegation of that Sanichar Sahni has assaulted the brother and nephew of the informant by Farsa causing injuries.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that main allegation is against Sanichar Sahni and there is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72707 of 2019(2) dt.19-11-2019 2/2 general and omnibus allegation against the petitioners and other accused persons and some of the accused persons have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail vide order dated 17.08.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. No. 51009 of 2019. On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer of bail of the petitioner on the ground that they are named in the F.I.R and there are allegations of overt acts against these petitioners. It has further submitted that accused persons who have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail are the females and as such lenient view has been taken. Having heard both sides, in view of the allegation as discussed above and materials collected, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, however, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned Court below and make prayer for regular bail which shall be considered on the basis of material available on record without being prejudiced by order of this Court .

With the aforesaid, this application is dismissed. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) T.Kr./- U T