High Court Patna High Court - Orders

Premlal Sahni @ Prema Sahni vs The State Of Bihar on 1 July, 2010

Patna High Court – Orders
Premlal Sahni @ Prema Sahni vs The State Of Bihar on 1 July, 2010
            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Cr.Misc. No.21924 of 2010
                   PREMLAL SAHNI @ PREMA SAHNI
                               Versus
                        THE STATE OF BIHAR
                            -----------

2. 01.7.2010. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf

of the petitioner and learned counsel appearing

on behalf of the State.

The petitioner is in custody in

connection with Moro P.S.Case No.17 of 2009 for

offence punishable under Sections 302/34 of the

Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner

submits that the name of this petitioner has been

given by the wife of the deceased who has stated

that the deceased before dying had informed her

that this petitioner along with the others had

assaulted him. Learned counsel, with reference to

the deposition of the informant made during the

course of trial and placed at Annexure-2 series,

submits that the informant herself has stated

that when she reached the place of occurrence,

her husband had already expired. Learned counsel

thus submits that in that view of the matter, the

initial statement given by the informant at the

stage of institution of the case becomes

doubtful. He further with reference to the
2

impugned order submits that the court below has

accepted the fact that four material witnesses

had been examined and who had not supported the

case of the prosecution.

Taking into consideration the submission

of the learned counsel for the petitioner, let

the petitioner Premlal Sahni alias Prema Sahni

be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond

of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties

of the like amount each to the satisfaction of

the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in

connection with Sessions Trial No.77 of 2010

arising from Moro P.S.Case No.17 of 2009,

subject to condition that the petitioner would be

present before the trial court on each and every

date fixed in the trial and in case the

petitioner would not present himself on two

consecutive dates fixed in the trial, the trial

court would be at liberty to initiate proceeding

for cancellation of his bail bond and for

taking him into custody.

ahk                          (Jyoti Saran, J.)
 3