Ranveer Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21040 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-725 Year-2023 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali ====================================================== Ranveer Kumar, S/o Shivnath Singh @ Chhedi Singh, R/o Village - Mahua Singh Rai West, P.S. - Mahua, Dist. - Vaishali ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amit Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 04-04-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 725 of 2023 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 384, 385, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, the informant received extortion call on his mobile phone from co-accused Raushan Kumar. The allegation against the petitioner is that earlier he and his brother were made accused in Mahua P.S. Case No.720 of 2023 and both the brothers have been threatening and demanding the extortion money from the informant.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is completely vague and no

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21040 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 2/3 specific allegation has been levelled against the petitioner. Merely because petitioner is the brother of co-accused Raushan Kumar, he has been falsely implicated in this case, though there is no allegation of any wrong doing against the petitioner. Even earlier Mahua P.S.Case No.720/2023 has been registered against the petitioner and his brother as the driver of the school bus of the informant was driving the bus rashly and it was opposed by the petitioner and others, but taking advantage of his position, the informant got that false case registered against the petitioner in which he is on bail. The learned counsel further submits that there is no allegation of delivery of any property or valuable security and hence, no offence under Section 384 IPC is made out against the petitioner.

5. Learned APP opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering completely vague nature of allegation against the petitioner with possibility of false implication, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court concerned within a period of eight weeks from today, be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21040 of 2024(2) dt.04-04-2024 3/3 sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Vaishali at Hajipur, in connection with Mahua P.S. Case No. 725 of 2023, subject to the conditions mentioned in Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and the following conditions:

(i) One of the bailors will be a close relative of the petitioner.

(ii) The petitioner will remain present on each and every date fixed by the court below, if so required by the learned trial court.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) V.K.Pandey/- U T