Patna High CourtCR. MISC./23994/2017rejected

Sushil Pandey v. The State Of Bihar

2017-06-22Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.23994 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -38 Year- 2016 Thana -BIHRA District- SAHARSA ======================================================

1. Sushil Pandey Son of Late Mahinarayan Pandey, Resident of VillageGandaul, P.S.- Bihra & District- Saharsa .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Mr. Diwakar Prasad Singh, Adv. For the Opposite Party : Smt. Anita Kumari, APP 239 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 22-06-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

This is a petition for grant of regular bail for offence under Sections 384, 386, 504, 506, 120B, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegation is that the petitioner, who is man of veteran criminal co-accused, Pappu Dev, demanded ransom on the point of arms from the informant, who is a businessman. Other eye witnesses have also supported the allegation of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not a member of the gang of co-accused, Pappu Dev, rather he is a co-villager of the informant and due to village politics he has falsely been implicated in this case. He is in custody since 28.03.2017. Further submission is that though the occurrence allegedly took place on 22.03.2017. However, the matter was reported to the police on 30.03.2017 and there is no reasonable explanation for the same.

Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, which is supported by other eye witnesses as well as considering the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, I am not

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.23994 of 2017 (4) dt.22-06-2017 2/2 inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

The prayer for bail is refused.

The petitioner may renew prayer for bail, if the trial is not concluded within nine months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order by the lower Court below. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial.

(Birendra Kumar, J) SA/- U √ T √