Patna High CourtCR. MISC./2783/2022bail rejected

Vikram Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

2022-06-20Mr. Justice Shailendra Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.2783 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-160 Year-2020 Thana- MOHIUDDIN NAGAR DistrictSamastipur ====================================================== VIKRAM KUMAR SINGH Son of Dablu Singh @ Mahesh Singh Resident of Village - Dharmpur, Police Station - Mohiuddin Nagar, District - Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Bijay Bhushan Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILENDRA SINGH ORAL ORDER 20-06-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

Petitioner seeks regular bail in Mohiuddin Nagar P.S. case no. 160 of 2020 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 120B, 386 and 115/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, petitioner and co-accused persons made extortion demand from the informant and his wife and also threatened to kill the informant, if the said demand was not fulfilled and later on, petitioner and co-accused persons again came at the house of the informant and threatened for extortion. The main submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case due to village politic and he has seven

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.2783 of 2022(2) dt.20-06-2022 2/2 criminal cases against which some cases was lodged by his wife relating to matrimonial dispute. Investigation has been completed in this case.

Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.

I have heard both sides and perused the FIR. Serious allegation against the petitioner appears to have been made and as per para 3 of the petition, he has criminal antecedent of seven cases and nature of the allegation appearing against the petitioner from FIR seems to be serious.

Considering these facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage and accordingly, his prayer for bail is rejected. Petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge in the present case.

(Shailendra Singh, J) s.hassan/- U T