Amar Sahni vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 211 Patna

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
             CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 32253 of 2020
    Arising Out of PS Case No.-88 Year-2019 Thana- HAYAGHAT District- Darbhanga
======================================================

Amar Sahni, aged about 29 years, Son of Mohit Sahni Resident of Village - Jagadishpur, P.S.- Hayaghat, District- Darbhanga.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s    :       Mr. Surya Narayan Yadav, Advocate
For the State           :       Mr. Md. Arif, APP

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 20-01-2021

Heard Mr. Surya Narayan Yadav, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Md. Arif, learned Incharge APP for the State.

2. The petitioner is in custody in connection with

Hayaghat PS Case No. 88 of 2019 dated 23.12.2019, instituted

under Sections 364(a) and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The allegation against the petitioner is that he was

one of the persons who had demanded Rs. 4 lakhs from the

informant and had kept him captive.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that only

for mentioning the name of the petitioner as being one of the

persons present, there is no other direct allegation against him. It

was submitted that the story in the FIR is absurd inasmuch as, the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32253 of 2020 dt.20-01-2021

informant has stated that he has come from Punjab, for getting

medicine for his ailing son, to Darbhanga and there it is alleged

that he was taken to a hut where he was told that because

somebody else had taken Rs. 4 lakhs from them relating to trade

in illicit liquor, the loss be compensated by the informant and for

that reason he was asked to call for Rs. 4 lakhs from his family

members. Learned counsel submitted that thereafter it has been

stated that the informant made a call on the number 100 and the

Officer In-charge of the concerned police station came and

rescued him, it cannot be believed that a person would be allowed

to talk freely on the mobile if he had been kidnapped. Learned

counsel submitted that the informant himself appears to be

involved in illicit trade of liquor and because of some dispute in

such business, the petitioner has been wrongly and falsely

implicated. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is in

custody since 17.02.2020.

5. Learned APP submitted that the involvement of the

petitioner in the illicit trade liquor is apparent as he has criminal

antecedent of two cases under the Bihar Excise Act, 2016 and

another under grave sections of the Indian Penal Code and also the

Arms Act and in the present case also, it is obvious that the

informant was kept against his will and not allowed to go home Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.32253 of 2020 dt.20-01-2021

despite his request and was asked to get Rs. 4 lakhs from his home

which leaves no doubt that Rs. 4 lakhs asked for was by way of

ransom to release him.

6. Having considered the facts and circumstances of the

case and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, for the present.

7. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.

(Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J.)

P. Kumar

AFR/NAFR U T