Patna High CourtCR. MISC./24866/2024dismissed

Nirala Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

2024-07-20Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.24866 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-15 Year-2024 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== Nirala Kumar son of Mahendra Mandal Village- Ratanpatti W.No-4, PsMurliganj Dist- Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Uday Chand Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Lakshmi Kant Sharma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 20-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seek bail in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 15 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the son of the informant Ashish Kumar was kidnapped by the criminals and Rs. 50 lakh was demanded as ransom on mobile phone.

4. The name of the petitioner has come in the selfinculpatory statement of one Zeevan Kumar and subsequently the present petitioner have also confessed his guilt. Moreover, during scientific investigation, the petitioner has been found to be involved in the kidnapping.

5. The petitioner is in jail since 25.01.2024.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.24866 of 2024(3) dt.20-07-2024 2/2

6. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not involved in the crime and he is a labour and has falsely been implicated in the present case. He also submits that there is no material against the petitioner to connect him with the crime.

7. I have heard and considered the submissions of the parties.

8. In view of the fact that petitioner is named in the self-inculpatory statement of one Zeevan Kumar, the scientific materials collected during investigation which shows that the petitioner was present at the place of occurrence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

9. Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

10. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial of the petitioner and conclude the same at the earliest. (Sandeep Kumar, J) Vikas/- U T