Kunal Saurabh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.17563 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -152 Year- 2014 Thana -SHEOHAR District- SHEOHAR ======================================================

1. Kunal Saurabh Son of Trivedi Ranjit Kumar Resident of Village - Bhorahan, P.S. Shayampur Bhatahan, District - Sheohar. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Md. Anisur Rahman For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.L.Pandit(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL ORDER 28-04-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. Petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sheohar P.S. Case No.152/14 for the offences alleged under Sections 467,468, 471, 420, 120B, 385 and 387 of the I.P.C. The prosecution case in brief is that, shop of sand and cement of the informant is situated in Kahrarwa Bazar and on 27.7.2014 while the informant was at his shop he received mobile call asking for Rs.5/- lacs as ransom from Mobil No.7563003251 which belongs to one Pankaj Patel but was in actual use of one of the accused Amit Kumar @ Happy Singh. Again on 1.8.2014 he received mobile call about his dire consequence on account of nonfulfillment of the aforesaid ransom. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.17563 of 2016 (3) dt.28-04-2016 2/2 petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid case on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused Amit Kumar @ Happy Singh. It has further been submitted that one of the co-accused, namely, Mukesh Singh has already been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.12.2015 passed in Cr.Misc. No.50264 of 2015.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State submits that although the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. but subsequently his name has surfaced and, hence, has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Be that as it may, as there is no evidentiary value of confessional statement in the eye of law, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest of surrender before the court below within eight weeks from today, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the C.J.M., Sheohar, in Sheohar P.S. Case No.152 of 2014 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.

(Nilu Agrawal, J) AnilKrSinha/- U T