Patna High CourtCR. MISC./19956/2020rejected

Arvind Kumar Verma v. The State Of Bihar

2020-09-07Mr. Justice Birendra Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.19956 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-343 Year-2015 Thana- SHERGHATI District- Gaya ====================================================== ARVIND KUMAR VERMA S/o Late Ramratan Prasad Resident of VillageMahkampur, P.S.- Barachatti, Distt- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Paras Nath, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Bilash Roy Raman, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-09-2020 This matter has been taken up through Video Conferencing.

Heard the parties.

The petitioner is languishing in custody for the offence punishable under Sections 387, 435 and 427/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act. According to F.I.R., electric cable was burnt by the miscreants as the agency which was engaged in installation of the same was not ready to pay ransom. The petitioner and others were identified by the eye witnesses. Those witnesses have supported the identification of the petitioner and others as perpetrators of the crime in their statements in Para-5 and 6 of the case diary.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19956 of 2020(3) dt.07-09-2020 2/2 petitioner is in custody since last eight months. Petitioner has got single criminal antecedent. Moreover, co-accused Birbal Das @ Birbal Ravidas and Uttam Kumar have already been allowed bail a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide orders at Annexure-2.

The orders at Annexure-2 do not show that the case diary was placed before the Hon'ble Bench and evidence of eye witnesses was brought to the notice of the Court. Considering the material against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge him on bail in connection with Sherghati P.S. Case No. 343 of 2015.

Hence, prayer for bail of the petitioner is refused. Learned trial Judge is directed to expedite the trial of the aforesaid case.

The petitioner may renew prayer for bail after framing of the charges.

(Birendra Kumar, J) mantreshwar/- U T