Sujit Kumar @ Sujit Kumar Bhandari v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.3459 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-386 Year-2019 Thana- NAANPUR District- Sitamarhi ====================================================== Sujit Kumar @ Sujit Kumar Bhandari Son of Shri Narayan Bhandari @ Shiv Narayan Bhandari Resident of Village- Riga, P.S.- Riga, District- Sitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Pushpendra Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. M. BADAR ORAL ORDER 10-03-2022 The applicant is an accused in Crime No. 386 of 2019 registered with Nanpur Police Station for the offences punishable under sections 386 and 387 of the Indian Penal Code.

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. He argued that there is no evidence against the applicant to connect him in the crime in question.

The learned APP opposed the application on the basis of counter affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer and submitted that there are witnesses who are supporting the prosecution case.

I have considered the submission so advanced and also perused the material placed on record.

According to the prosecution case, first informant

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3459 of 2022(4) dt.10-03-2022 2/3 Sanjay Kumar had noted a hand written chit pasted to the door of his medical shop on 14.10.2019. In that chit there was a demand of ransom of Rs. 10 lakh. He suspected the applicant to be the person who is demanding that ransom. The first informant claims that he received calls from two numbers mentioned by him in the FIR. During the course of those calls, there was demand of ransom of Rs. 10 lakhs.

Affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer shows that some witnesses have heard about demand of ransom. Forensic evidence in respect of handwriting on the chit is not forthcoming. It is reported by the Investigating Officer that the phone numbers from which the phone calls were received by the first informant were of the other countries. The applicant is resident of India and is undergoing pre-trial detention after filing of the charge-sheet. In the wake of this evidence, I see no reason to refuse bail to the applicant, and therefore,the order. I. The application is allowed.

II. The applicant/accused in Crime No. 386 of 2019 registered with Nanpur Police Station is directed to be released on bail on executing P.R. Bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) on furnishing sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with the following conditions:-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.3459 of 2022(4) dt.10-03-2022 3/3 (I) The applicant/accused should not extend any threat, promise of inducement to the persons acquainted with the facts of the accusation against him so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. (II) The applicant/accused should cooperate the trial in expeditious disposal of the trial against him. (III) The applicant/accused should not contact the members of the prosecuting party as well as witnesses in this case in any manner till conclusion of the trial. (IV) The applicant should not repeat commission of similar offence in future and if he is found to be involved in commission of similar offence, the State is at liberty to apply for cancellation of bail granted to the applicant in the instant case. The applicant to remove all office objections forthwith and the Registry to issue certified copy of this order only after removal of office objections by the applicant/accused. (A. M. Badar, J) Ravi/- U T