Ranveer Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.23871 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-634 Year-2021 Thana- BANKA District- Banka ====================================================== Ranveer Kumar S/o Raju @ Rajkishor Yadav, R/o village- Chakkadih, P.S.- Banka, District- Banka ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Mukherjee, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DR. ANSHUMAN ORAL ORDER 03-11-2022 Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within two weeks from today.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Banka P.S. Case No. 634 of 2021, lodged under Sections 363 and 365 of the Indian Penal Code.

As per prosecution case, the informant has disclosed that his son was abducted by unknown criminal, who was playing in front of his house.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is a case of kidnapping and the alleged victim was recovered and after recovery the statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. was recorded by the Court, and in the said statement the victim has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.23871 of 2022(3) dt.03-11-2022 2/2 disclosed the name of present petitioner, that he is involved in the crime. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner is in custody since 13.12.2021. He further submits that there is an inimical relation with the informant and relative of petitioner namely Bhanu, and it is due to this reason the case has been implanted against him. He further submits that there are two criminal antecedents of petitioner, but he is a law abiding citizen and he is on bail in both the cases. Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the case of kidnapping has been filed against unknown person and only after recovery of victim the statement was recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. and the name of petitioner has figured.

In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner, therefore, his bail application is hereby rejected. The petitioner is at liberty to renew his prayer for bail after 9 months if trial shall not be concluded. (Dr. Anshuman, J.) ritik/- U T