Allowed

Santosh Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC2 Nov 2021CR. MISC./18649/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court granted bail to the petitioner in a robbery case under Section 392 IPC. The Court relied on the absence of testimonial evidence from a test identification parade and the petitioner's clean record, directing his release on a Rs. 10,000 bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail with bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties of equal amount. Conditions include having a close relative as bailor, maintaining address, and appearing on consecutive dates.

Santosh Sahni Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18649 of 2021

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-101 Year-2020 Thana- AURAI District- Muzaffarpur

¶3

====================================================== Santosh Sahni, male, aged about 26 years, Son of Ram Pratap Sahani

¶4

Resident of Village-Bagaravan @ Bagarban, P.S.- Nanpur, Dist.- Sitamarhi.

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Ritesh Kumar Narain Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MADHURESH PRASAD ORAL ORDER

¶7

2 02-11-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor (for short ‘APP’) for the State.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner is expected to honour his undertaking given in the instant case for depositing the requisite court fee and to remove the defects as pointed out by office when called upon to do so by the office.

¶9

The petitioner seeks bail in Aurai P S Case No. 101 of 2020 instituted for the offence under Section 392 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

The case of the prosecution in brief is that the informant, who is the Manager of the Consumer Service Center of the State

¶11

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18649 of 2021(2) dt.02-11-2021 2/4

¶12

Bank of India, had gone with one other person to S.B.I. Aurai for withdrawing money on 08.05.2020 at about 3 pm in the evening. It is further alleged that they had taken out a sum of Rs. 4,50,000/- from the Bank and the informant was having a sum of Rs. 10,000/- from before which he had kept in a bag and had left the Bank at about 3.45 pm for his Center on his motorcycle and when the informant and his friend had reached at the alleged place of occurrence, unknown miscreants had overtaken the motorcycle of the informant and had hit the dicky of the motorcycle of the informant, resulting in the informant and his friend having fallen down on the road, whereafter the said miscreants had assaulted the informant with the butt of the pistol and then they had taken the bag of the informant filled with money and had fled away.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent. He has falsely been implicated in the present case and is languishing in custody since 20.05.2020 though he has no criminal antecedents. It is further submitted that neither the petitioner is named in the FIR nor any test identification parade has been held so as to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. Similarly situated co-accused, Upendra Sahni has been granted bail in Cr. Misc. no. 28944 of

¶14

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18649 of 2021(2) dt.02-11-2021 3/4

¶15

¶16

The learned APP representing the State has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶17

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that no test identification parade has been held so as to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime and the petitioner is languishing in custody since 20.05.2020, this Court, for the purposes of grant of bail, is inclined to accept the submissions advanced by the petitioner’s counsel. Prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. Let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur, in connection with Aurai P S Case No. 101 of 2020, subject to the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) That one of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner who will give an affidavit giving genealogy as to how he is related with the petitioner. The bailor will also undertake to inform the Court if there is any change in the address of the petitioner.

¶19

(ii) That the petitioner will be well represented on each

¶20

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18649 of 2021(2) dt.02-11-2021 4/4

¶21

date and if he fails to do so on two consecutive dates, his bail

¶22

bond will be liable to be cancelled.

¶23

(Madhuresh Prasad, J)

¶24

shyambihari/-

¶25

U T

Santosh Sahni v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh 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

Ravi Hareshlal Chugh Vs the Union of India through the Intelligence Officer, D.R.I., Regional Unit, Patna

Kalo Devi Vs the State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Home Affairs, Bihar, Patna

Mritunjay Kumar Vs The State of Bihar

Ramrati Devi Vs The State of Bihar

Mange Ram @ Mango Ram Vs the State of Bihar

Nitish Yadav @ Nitish Kumar Vs The State of Bihar