Nawal Kishore Mandal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.7295 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -456 Year- 2015 Thana -KAHALGAON District- BHAGALPUR ====================================================== Nawal Kishore Mandal Son of Nand Lal Mandal, resident of village (Athgama) Purani Pannuchak, P.S. Sabour, Dist. Bhagalpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Praveen Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ram Shankar Das (Spl.APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL ORDER 11-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

In this case, the petitioner is seeking bail in connection with Kahalgaon (Ghogha) P.S. Case No. 456 of 2015 registered for offences under Sections 365, 328, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per the first information report, the victim is the informant. Allegation has been made against the petitioner on giving allurement of job, had carried the informant on 25.10.2015, they came to Sultanganj by 'Intercity' train and moved towards Tarapur and in the way some intoxicant materials were given to the informant and thereafter, he became unconscious. When he regained his conscious, he found himself in a

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.7295 of 2016 (3) dt.11-04-2016 2/2 closed room and Rs.16,000/- which he was carrying, was taken away. Later on, on the threat of the life, the accused persons have forcibly compelled the victim to reveal the pin code of his ATM and thereafter, they have withdrawn the amount from the Bank through the ATM.

As per the statement of the victim, on 27.10.2015 he was dumped in train going towards Kolkata, he recovered his conscious at Shivnarayanpur, he dropped down there, later on, he came to Ghogha Station, lodged the first information report. The counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a discrepancy in the statement made in first information report as in the first information report allegation has been made of taking away Rs. 16,000/- but subsequently, the amount has been enhanced as Rs. 36,000/-.

Save and except variation in amount, story is same. At present, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this petition is rejected. However, liberty is given to the petitioner that he may renew his prayer for bail after completion of nine months of custody.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) Mahesh/- U T