Chandan Ram v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.33210 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-71 Year-2019 Thana- TURKAULIYA District- East Champaran ====================================================== Chandan Ram son of Bharat Ram, Resident of village - Raghunathpur, Police Station- Turkauliya, District- East Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjay Kumar No 7 For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dinesh Singh (APP) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-12-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State. This application for grant of regular bail arises out of Turkauliya (Banjariya) P.S. Case No. 71 of 2019 registered for the offence punishable under Section 387 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is the prosecution's case that the informant was earlier threatened of life by some unknown criminals. Subsequently, on mobile phone no. 9400000094, extortion money of a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- was demanded. Again such demand was made on 04.02.2019.

The caller had disclosed his name to be Suman Saurav. The caller was subsequently apprehended and in his confessional statement recorded by the police, he is said to have

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33210 of 2020(2) dt.18-12-2020 2/2 disclosed the petitioner's name, who was associated in the crime. From paragraph 3 of the application, it appears that the petitioner has criminal antecedent of being involved in 15 cases, all of which are of serious nature.

I must record here that the petitioner has given the list of 15 cases, in which he is involved. From the order of the learned 12th Additional Sessions Judge, East Champaran, Motihari whereby petitioner's application for grant of regular bail was rejected by an order dated 19.06.2020, however, it appears that there are 19 criminal cases pending against the petitioner.

In the aforesaid background, considering the fact that the confessional statement is corroborated by the materials collected in course of investigation and the seriousness of the offence as well as the petitioner's criminal antecedent, I am not inclined to grant the petitioner, privilege of regular bail for the present.

This application is accordingly rejected.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) AKASH/- U T