Amarjit Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83136 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-3 Year-2019 Thana- SAMASTIPUR MUFFASIL DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== AMARJIT SAHANI, aged about 32 years, Male, Son of Late Paltu Sahani @ Late Rajeshwar Sahani, Resident of Village - Gopalpur, P.S.- Kalyanpur, Distt.- Samastipur ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Bijay Bhushan Prasad, Adv.

For the Opposite Party :

Mr. Bal Mukund Prasad Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 09-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the state.

The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with Samastipur Muffasil P.S. Case No. 3 of 2019, pending in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, V, Samastipur, registered under Sections 302 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

The accusation is that the petitioner (Amarjit Sahani) has taken cash of Rs.40,000/- from Sunil Sahani, husband of the informant, Savita Devi. On several requests, petitioner told to give the said money on 05.01.2019, due to that reason Sunil Sahani, husband of the informant, proceeded from his motorcycle with Ramesh Thakur. On 05.01.2019, in late evening he also talked to her on phone saying that he is coming

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83136 of 2019(2) dt.09-01-2020 2/2 to house, but, did not return. Later on, information was received that her husband is killed. Informant raised suspicion against the petitioner and others.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case mere on suspicion as he had taken loan of Rs.40,000/- from deceased and he had not paid and for payment petitioner called to husband of the informant on 05.01.2019.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner. The prayer for pre-arrest bail is rejected. The petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below and seek regular bail, which will be considered on its own merit and without being prejudiced of this order.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) Shamshad/- U T