Shubhkant Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.72488 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-82 Year-2019 Thana- SARAI RANJAN District- Samastipur ====================================================== 1.

SHUBHKANT SAHNI Son of Surendra Sahni @ Sakulchi Sahni Resident of Village - Raipur Tara, P.S.- Sarairanjan, Distt.- Samastipur. 2.

Devkant Sahni Son of Surendra Sahni @ Sakulchi Sahni Resident of Village - Raipur Tara, P.S.- Sarairanjan, Distt.- Samastipur. 3.

Surendra sahni @ Sakulchi Sahni Son of Chandar Sahni Resident of Village - Raipur Tara, P.S.- Sarairanjan, Distt.- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jitendra Narain Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ajay Kumar Jha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 06-02-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Sarairanjan P.S. Case No.82 of 2019 registered under Sections 302, 323, 324/34 and 341 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VI, Samastipur. The accusation is that in the late evening of 04.06.2019, the petitioners and one Arun Sahni started to abuse and cause assault to Bhulla Sahni, the son of the informant Mahendra Sahni, in course of playing card. While the informant tried to pacify the matter but, in that course, he also received injury on his back, neck and forehead. Due to night, the informant could not be able to rush to his son for

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.72488 of 2019(2) dt.06-02-2020 2/2 his treatment. In the next morning, when the informant woke up, he found his son dead.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that while six multiple injuries were found in the postmortem examination of the son of the informant but the cause of his death of the son of the informant was due to "Asphyxia produced by throttling".

Having considered the facts and the circumstances of the case and the nature of allegation against the petitioners, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the prayer of the petitioners for grant of anticipatory bail stands rejected. However, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the trial court within four weeks from today and pray for regular bail, which shall be considered by the trial court in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the order of this Court.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) P.S./- U T