Sayed Shahbaz Ali @ Shahbaz @ Vicky v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.5110 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -885 Year- 2015 Thana -MUZAFFARPUR TOWN DistrictMUZAFFARPUR ====================================================== Sayed Shahbaz Ali @ Shahbaz @ Vicky, S/O- Sayed Ghulam Farooque, Permanent resident of village- Bara, P.S. Gahmar, Distt.- Ghazipur (U.P.), and presently residing at mohalla- Lichi Bagan, Railway Colony, Maripur, P.S. Kazi Mohammadpur, Distt.- Muzaffarpur.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mahendra Thakur For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kr.Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 31-03-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 364 (A) and 120 (B) of the I.P.C Allegedly, Md. Mustaque, the husband of the informant, was kidnapped and ransom of Rs. 20,000/- was demanded by the co-accused Ratnesh with a direction to pay the ransom amount to the petitioner and Aftab. Thereafter, the informant informed the police and went to pay the ransom amount and then the petitioner was arrested as soon as he was trying to receive the amount of Rs. 7,000/- from the informant and he confessed his guilt.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5110 of 2016 (3) dt.31-03-2016 2/2 Submission is of false implication and that the victim is himself a criminal and at present he is in custody, he has taken some money and for that he was detained so that the money can be realized but the informant falsely implicated the petitioner resulting the petitioner is suffering in custody since 15.11.2015. The learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioner was arrested by the police as soon as he tried to receive the amount of Rs. 7,000/- from the informant by way of ransom.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, serious in nature, at this stage I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with Town P.S. Case No. 885 of 2015 pending in the court of C.J.M. Muzaffarpur.

However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after framing of charge.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) Abhay/- U T