Vimal Kumar @ Vimal Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28674 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-55 Year-2024 Thana- RAMPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Vimal Kumar @ Vimal Yadav S/O Naresh Yadav @ Ram Naresh Yadav R/O Village- Khairi Itwan, Post- Kasma, P.S- Kasma, Distt.- Aurangabad (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, Sr. Advocate Mr.Bhaskar Shankar, Advocate For the State :
Mr.Harendra Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 11-07-2025 Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. This is the second attempt on behalf of the petitioner for grant of bail in connection with Rampur P.S. Case No. 55 of 2024 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 386, 387, 353, 414, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13, 18, 19 and 20 of the UAP Act
3. Earlier the bail application of the petitioner has been rejected vide order dated 25.09.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 53707 of 2024, which reads as under:
"Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Rampur P.S. Case No. 55 of 2024 registered for the offence under Sections 386, 387, 353, 414, 120B of the Indian Penal
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28674 of 2025(3) dt.11-07-2025 2/2 Code and Section 13, 18, 19 and 20 of the UAP Act.
3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner is said to have been caught when he was delivering the letter for demand of extortion money of Rs. 7 Lakhs to the informant.
4. During investigation sufficient materials have come to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. Petitioner is in custody since 05.02.2024.
5. Considering the gravity of offence and the nature of accusation, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. This application for regular bail is hereby rejected."
4. The police papers have been supplied to the petitioner.
5. Considering the allegation that the petitioner is involved in demand of extortion of Rs. 7 lakhs and the fact that the case is registered under the UAP Act also, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
6. Accordingly, the application stands dismissed.
7. The Court below is directed to expedite the trial. (Sandeep Kumar, J) P. Kumar U T