Delay in lodging an FIR and the absence of criminal antecedents can be factors in favor of granting bail.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51834 of 2021

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2020 Thana- UJIYARPUR District- Samastipur

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

MUNNA SAHNI S/O SHIVNATH SAHNI R/o village- Jitwarpur, Bhuskara,

P.S.- Tajpur (Halai), District- Samastipur

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR

... ... Opposite Party/s

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

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr.Krishna Kant Singh, Adv

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.A.P.P.

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

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA

ORAL ORDER

2

05-01-2022

Let the defects, as pointed out by the office, be

removed within four weeks of starting of Court proceeding in

physical mode in normal course.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned A.P.P. for the State in virtual Court proceeding.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Ujiyarpur

P.S.Case No.303 of 2020 registered for the offence under

Sections 147, 149, 395/326A/326B, 328, 307, 323, 494, 498A,

504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections

8,10,12,14,16/18 of the POCSO Act.

Prosecution case in short is that the

complainant/informant having known that her husband Munna

Sahni has married another lady, went to her Sasural with her

minor daughter and other family members. It is further alleged

that on reaching her Sasural, the complainant/informant was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51834 of 2021(2) dt.05-01-2022

2/3

surrounded and threatened of dire consequences by accused

persons. It is also alleged that the accused persons started

committing obscenity with her, her clothes were torn. Further it

is alleged that the accused started pouring poison into

complainant’s/informant’s mouth.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits

that the petitioner has clean antecedent. He further submits that

the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case.

He further submits that after investigation, police has submitted

chargesheet under Sections 341,323,498A,494 and 34 IPC and

under Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. He further submits

that accordingly vide order dated 01.02.2021 cognizance has

been taken under Sections 341,323,379,498A,494 IPC and

Section 3/4 of D.P.Act. He further submits that it appears from

the FIR itself that the date of occurrence as mentioned in the

FIR is 12.07.2020 and the present FIR has been lodged on

04.10.2020. Petitioner is in custody since 30.11.2020.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer for

bail of the petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case,

let the petitioner, above named, be released on bail on furnishing

bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51834 of 2021(2) dt.05-01-2022

3/3

the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M.,

Dalsingsarai, Samastipur in connection with Ujiyarpur P.S.Case

No.303 of 2020 with the following conditions:-

(1) Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be

properly represented on each and every date fixed by the Court

and shall remain physically present as directed by the Court and

on his/her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient

reason, his/her bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below.

(2) If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the

witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move

for cancellation of bail.

And, further condition that the court below shall

verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at

any stage, it is found that the petitioner has concealed his

criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for

cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

acceptance of bail bonds in terms of the above-mentioned order

shall not be delayed for purpose of or in