Patna High CourtCR. MISC./19158/2024bail rejected

Mona @ Mohan Kumar @ Rohit Kumar @ Mohan v. The State Of Bihar

2024-05-08Mr. Justice Dr. Anshuman2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19158 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-384 Year-2022 Thana- BUNIYAD GANJ District- Gaya ====================================================== Mona @ Mohan Kumar @ Rohit Kumar @ Mohan S/o Bachchan Gupta @ Rambachan @ Rambachan Gupta @ Rambachan Prasad Gupta R/o Vill - Manpur Teli Tola, Ishwar Chaudhary Halt, P.S. - Muffasil, Dist - Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Priya Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dilip Kumar No. 1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 08-05-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Buniyadganj P.S. Case No. 384 of 2022, lodged on 18.11.2022 under Sections 386/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged against five named accused persons including the present petitioner against whom there is an allegation that they were demanding ransom from some businessmen of the locality.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The aggrieved persons have not filed the FIR rather it is the police who have filed the FIR due to the reason that the antecedent of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19158 of 2024(3) dt.08-05-2024 2/2 the petitioner is not clean. The petitioner is in custody since 09.08.2023 and is accused in five more criminal cases. Moreover, similarly situated co-accused, namely, Vikash Kumar has been granted bail vide order dated 06.12.2023 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 64254 of 2023.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the case of demand of ransom has to be looked strictly.

6. In the present facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner in connection with Buniyadganj P.S. Case No. 384 of 2022, pending before the learned ACJM-VIII, Gaya is hereby rejected.

8. However, the petitioner would be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after one year of the framing of the charge, if not framed.

(Dr. Anshuman, J) Ashwini/- U T