Sushil Kumar Jha @ Sushil Jha @ Bipul Kumar And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47211 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -85 Year- 2016 Thana -LODIPUR District- BHAGALPUR ======================================================

1. Sushil Kumar Jha @ Sushil Jha @ Bipul Kumar, son of Late Nitya Nand Jha, resident of Mohalla- Mundichak, P.S.- Ishaqchak, DistrictBhagalpur.

2. Arbind Singh @ Bahadur, Son of Jai Prakash Singh, Resident of T.N. Katchahari Compound, P.S.- Adampur, District- Bhagalpur, Permanent resident of Village- Muradpur, P.S.- Rajoun, District- Banka. .... .... Petitioners

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Jha, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. A.M. Mehta, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 19-01-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Lodipur P.S. Case no. 85 of 2016, registered under Sections 365, 347 and 348 of the Indian Penal Code.

The accusation is that Sushil Kumar, son of the informant, had gone to his filed but he did not return. On search she came to know from Makru Mandal that his son Sushil Kumar had gone with Basuki Mandal. Thereafter, informant raised suspicion regarding execution of sale deed after giving threatening to her son Sushil Kumar by the accused.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in course

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47211 of 2016 (3) dt.19-01-2017 2/2 of investigation one Raj Roshan Kumar, who was tenant of petitioner No.2 disclosed the name of these petitioners having hand in the kidnapping of Susil Kumar, son of the informant. When Susil Kumar returned to his house then he gave his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that only Basuki Mandal and Prakash have carried him he further disclosed the name of one Saheb that they are involved in taking his signature on the stamp paper. Further submission is that petitioner No.2 is well known to the victim Sushil Kumar as Suhil Kumar executed the agreement to sale in respect to land to petitioner no.2 on 09.04.2016, but he has not disclosed the name of petitioner no.2. Further submission is that petitioners have no criminal antecedent.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioners, be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the ACJM-4, Bhagalpur in connection with Lodipur P.S. Case No.85 of 2016, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T