Dismissed

Arvind Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

Patna HC14 Mar 2019CR. MISC./71905/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged rejection of bail in a serious offenses case involving FIR sections including attempted murder, weapons, and assault. Court rejected bail despite co-accused release, noting petitioner allegedly fired causing death, and directed trial court to expedite trial within one year.

What did the court decide?

None. Bail dismissed; case directed to be expedited for trial within one year.

Arvind Sahni Vs The State Of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.71905 of 2018

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2015 Thana- BEGUSARAI MUFFASIL DistrictBegusarai

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Arvind Sahni S/o Late Bharat Sahni, Resident of Village-Kaithma, P.S.Mufassil, District-Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State Of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arjun Prasad For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Braj Kishore Prasad ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER

¶11

4 14-03-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

¶12

The petitioner Arvind Sahni has been in custody since 15.05.2018 in connection with Begusarai Mufassil P.S. Case No. 71/2015 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 447/341/324/307/504/34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 27 of the Arms Act. Later on, Section 302 Indian Penal Code was also added.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the allegation against the petitioner is of having fired at the deceased yet it cannot be conclusively said that because of the petitioner’s firing, the deceased succumbed to his injuries. He thus submits that the petitioner may be extended the privilege of bail. He further points out to the orders passed by the Court

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.71905 of 2018(4) dt.14-03-2019 2/2

¶15

wherein other co-accused persons who were also named in the F.I.R. have been given the privilege of bail.

¶16

However, considering the entire facts and circumstances and especially in view of the fact that the petitioner Arvind Sahni along with Sanjay Sahni is said to have fired at the deceased which ultimately culminated in his death. I am not inclined to grant regular bail to this petitioner.

¶17

It is accordingly rejected.

¶18

It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though chargesheet has been submitted, the case has not yet been committed for trial. It is thus directed that the Court below may take necessary steps so that the matter is placed before the court for trial and the trial may be expedited so as to conclude within a period of one year from today.

¶19

(Anjana Mishra, J)

¶20

Saif/-

¶21

U T

Arvind Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Sahni v. The State Of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chuna Choudhary @ Sanjit Kumar Choudhary @ Sanjit Choudhary Vs The State Of Bihar

Indradeo Paswan Vs The State Of Bihar

Md. Rajjak and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Anil Kumar Roy @ Anil Roy Vs The State Of Bihar

Sandeep Singh Yadav and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Sunil Kumar and Ors. Vs The State Of Bihar