Rakesh Ranjan Mishra @ Rajesh Ranjan Mishra @ Bablu Jha @ Babloo v. The State Of Bihar

9IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23371 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-89 Year-2023 Thana- SAHEBPUR KAMAL District- Begusarai ====================================================== Rakesh Ranjan Mishra @ Rajesh Ranjan Mishra @ Bablu Jha @ Babloo SON OF BIMAL KANT MISHRA @ VIMAL KANT MISHRA @ TUNTUN JHA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- SAHEBPUR KAMAL (TARBANNA), PSSAHEBPUR KAMAL, DIST- BEGUSARAI ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Suresh Prasad Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 09-08-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 89 of 2023 punishable under Sections 307, 341, 323, 325 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, all the accused persons including the petitioner are said to have mentally tortured and assaulted the daughter of the informant by means of lathi, danda and caused her badly injured. After that they took her away in a new car and thrown her in the Battiya Valley in Jamui.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that the petitioner is husband of the daughter of the informant. He submits that they were going to

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23371 of 2024(4) dt.09-08-2024 2/2 Deoghar by car in the meantime they met with an accident. He further submits that there was no intention to cause death as there was no intervening circumstance and the so called injured Nisha Kumari found conscious and alive by the police in Jamui. He further submits that that the informant want to extort the money and land from the petitioner and his family members. He submits that petitioner has got one criminal antecedent as stated in para-3 of the bail application and is in custody since 03.01.2024.

5. Per contra, learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the bail application and submits that the allegation levelled against the petitioner is serious in nature and there is ample evidence against the petitioner in the case diary. Hence, he does not deserve bail.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Sahepur Kamal P.S. Case No. 89 of 2023. Accordingly, his prayer for bail is hereby rejected. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Prakash/- U