Dismissed

Nawal Sahani v. The State of Bihar

Patna HC25 Aug 2023CR. MISC./49231/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Second bail plea in a kidnapping-cum-murder case involving ransom demand. The court noted the earlier rejection on merit and partial trial progress, declined bail, but directed completion of trial within three months with liberty to renew the bail prayer if not concluded.

What did the court decide?

Bail prayer rejected; trial directed to be concluded within three months, failing which petitioner may renew bail prayer.

Nawal Sahani Vs The State of Bihar — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Patna HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49231 of 2023

¶2

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-50 Year-2021 Thana- PUNAURA District- Sitamarhi

¶3

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

¶4

NAWAL SAHANI Son of Lakshami Sahani Resident of village - Madanpur, P.S. - Parsauni, Distt. - Sitamarhi

¶5

... ... Petitioner/s

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Bihar Bihar

¶8

... ... Opposite Party/s

¶9

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Sanjay Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Tarkeshwar Nath Thakur ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER

¶11

3 25-08-2023

¶12

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶13

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Punaura P.S. Case No.50 of 2021 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366(A), 302, 201, 120(b) of the IPC.

¶14

As per prosecution case, the son of the informant was kidnapped and demand of Rs. 10 lakh was made by way of ransom.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on 11.08.2022 the bail of the present petitioner has already been rejected by this Court Vide Cr. Misc. No. 71937 of 2021 with an observation that trial court is directed to conclude the trial preferably within nine months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. He further submits that the FIR was registered against accused persons using the mobile numbers from which the demand of ransom was

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49231 of 2023(3) dt.25-08-2023 2/3

¶17

made. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner was not named in the FIR and his name transpired in the present case upon the confessional statement of co-accused. No incriminating article has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Petitioner bears no criminal antecedent. He further submits that since the date of rejection of the prayer for bail of the petitioner, there was no progress in the trial of the case and the delay of trial is not attributable to the petitioner as he is custody since 23.03.2021.

¶18

The learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that earlier bail prayer of the petitioner has already been rejected on merit vide order dated 11.08.2022 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 71937 of 2021. Learned APP further submits that in course of investigation the accused persons were arrested and the confessional statement of the five named accused persons including the present petitioner was recorded which led to recovery of the dead body of informant’s son.

¶19

A report regarding stage of trial has been called for vide order dated 02.08.2023. The trial court vide letter no. 167/2023 has sent its report in which it has been submitted that seven witnesses have been examined including I.O. and Doctor. The report further reveals that four prosecution witnesses are yet to be examined including informant (mother of deceased), father of deceased and seizure list witnesses.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,

¶21

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.49231 of 2023(3) dt.25-08-2023 3/3

¶22

particularly keeping in view that earlier bail prayer of the petitioner has been rejected on merit as well as report of the trial court, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.

¶23

However, trial court is directed to conclude the trial within three months from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order and if the trial is not concluded within three months, petitioner may renew the prayer for bail.

¶24

(Alok Kumar Pandey, J)

¶25

vashudha/-

¶26

U T

Nawal Sahani v. The State of Bihar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nawal Sahani 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

Rakesh Kumar @ Chandan Mandal Vs The State of Bihar

Guddu Chaudhary Vs The State of Bihar

Sahdeo Ram Vs The State of Bihar

Jagdish Korgiya @ Jagdish Korogiya @ Jagdish Yadav Vs the State of Bihar

Nawal Mahto Vs The State of Bihar

Deepak Das Vs The State of Bihar