Rakesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17619 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2023 Thana- SHANKARPUR District- Madhepura ====================================================== Rakesh Kumar Son of Jitan Yadav @ Jitendra Yadav, Resident of VillageNavtoliya Shankarpur, Ward No. 14, Police Station- Shankarpur, DistrictMadhepura. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-04-2024 Heard Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Md. Mushtaque Alam, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

Petitioner seeks regular bail who is in custody since 27.03.2023 in connection with Shankarpur P.S. Case No. 20 of 2023, FIR dated 01.02.2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 386, 384, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of Arms Act.

3.

Earlier the petitioner has moved before this Hon'ble Court in Cr. Misc. No. 44931 of 2023, which was rejected vide order dated 28.08.2023.

4.

According to the prosecution case, one Rakesh Kumar along with unknown accused persons entered into the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17619 of 2024(3) dt.19-04-2024 2/3 shop of the informant and on gunpoint demanded Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh) as rangdari and also took Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand) cash from informant's pocket. 5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case and petitioner has not demanded any ransom from the informant. 6.

Vide order dated 01.03.2024 a report was called for with regard to the stage of the trial and report dated 09.04.2024 of the learned trial Court reveals that charge has been framed against the petitioner on 18.03.2024 and case in pending for the examination of the witnesses.

7.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State on the other hand has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that petitioner carries four criminal antecedents other than the present one, however, he fairly admits that the petitioner is on bail in the pending matters. 8.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the report of the learned trial Court as well as the allegation in the FIR and the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Shankarpur P.S. Case No. 20 of 2023, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Madhepura.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17619 of 2024(3) dt.19-04-2024 3/3 9.

Prayer is refused.

10.

However, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same at the earliest. (Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Shahnawaz/- U T