Md. Naved Raza v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24020 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-354 Year-2023 Thana- BAHADURPUR District- Patna ====================================================== Md. Naved Raza son of Md. Naiyar Alam Village- Shadipur Bhutaha PsBaisi Dist- Purnea ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ajay Kumar Thakur Mr.Vaishnavi Singh Mr. Ritwik Thakur For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr Shailendra Kumar, APP Mr. Arvind Kumar Pradhan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NAWNEET KUMAR PANDEY CAV ORDER 23-09-2024 I have already heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. This is an application for regular bail on behalf of the petitioner for the offences alleged under Sections 363 and 364 of the Indian Penal Code registered in connection with Bahadurpur P.S.Case No. 354 of 2023.
3. The informant Md. Azim states in his written report that his son Md. Ali Asgar aged 15 years (the deceased) was an inmate of Abedin House in New Azimabad Colony, Patna. His son was kidnapped five days prior to lodging of the FIR. The informant received a phone call from mobile of his son bearing no. 9973521277. The caller was demanding ransom for
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24020 of 2024(6) dt.23-09-2024 2/3 release of his son. On 23.09.2023 at 8.00 p.m. the caller had asked the informant to pay Rs. 20 lacs on the same day and he threatened the informant not to disclose the occurrence, otherwise his son would be killed.
4. During the course of investigation, it was detected that the petitioner and the deceased were preparing for NEET examination and they were room partners. The deceased was belonging to an affluent family, whereas the petitioner was belonging to a family, which is not well off. The petitioner along with his other associates (friends) hatched a conspiracy to extort ransom from the father of the deceased and in pursuance of the conspiracy, he killed the deceased.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated. He is an aspirant of NEET. It has also been submitted that none had seen the occurrence and except the confessional statement of the petitioner, there is nothing against him in the entire case diary. Learned counsel has submitted further that the confessional statement of the petitioner is not leading to recovery and as such, it has no evidentiary value.
6. On the other hand, the learned APP for the state has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that during the course
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24020 of 2024(6) dt.23-09-2024 3/3 of investigation the petitioner was arrested and he had given vivid description of the entire occurrence describing the murder of the deceased. When he was arrested his mobile set was recovered from his possession and it was detected in the CDR that he was in touch with the deceased prior to his death.
7. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, it is not a fit case to grant the privilege of bail to the petitioner. It is accordingly rejected.
(Nawneet Kumar Pandey, J) HR/- U T