Sanjay Patel v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.17396 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-75 Year-2019 Thana- PURNAHYA District- Sheohar ====================================================== Sanjay Patel S/o Maheshwar Patel, R/o Vill - Basantpatti @ Vasantpatti, P.S. - Purnahiya @ Purnahia, Dist. - Sheohar.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Rabindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 19-04-2024 Heard Mr. Santosh Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rabindra Kumar, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2.

Petitioner seeks regular bail who is in custody since 18.05.2020 in connection with Purnahia P.S. Case No. 75 of 2019, FIR dated 20.08.2019, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 387, 384, 307 and 326 read with Section 34 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. 50931 of 2022, which was rejected vide order dated 04.04.2023.

4.

According to the prosecution case, the informant's clerk received an extortion letter in which Rs. 20,00,000/-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17396 of 2024(3) dt.19-04-2024 2/3 (Rupees twenty lakhs) was demanded from the informant and he was also threatened to be killed if not given. It is further alleged that he also received a call from one Patelji, who demanded five percent of levy of the total work. It is further alleged that JCB driver namely, Ravi Kumar Yadav was shot due to which he got badly injured and it is suspected that the petitioner and coaccused person namely, Manish are responsible for the said incident.

5.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation levelled in the FIR is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. 6.

Vide order dated 01.03.2024 a report was called for with regard to the stage of the trial and report dated 09.03.2024 of the learned trial Court reveals that trial is going on and informant and one Rajesh Ram have been examined and crossexamined and they have been discharged. 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 has twenty-one criminal antecedents other than the present one, however, he fairly admits that he is on bail in all the pending matters. 8.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances,

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.17396 of 2024(3) dt.19-04-2024 3/3 the report of the learned trial Court as well as the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Purnahia P.S. Case No. 75 of 2019, pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Sheohar/Competent Jurisdiction.

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