Sonu Kumar @ Sanni Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.38934 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2024 Thana- BYPASS District- Patna ====================================================== Sonu Kumar @ Sanni Kumar, S/O Ajay Mehta Resident of Village-Gaighat, Bajrangpuri, P.S-Alamganj, District-Patna ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Kumar Kaushlendra, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Ramesh Chandra, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL DUTTA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 26-07-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Bypass P.S. Case No. 74 of 2024 for the offences registered under Sections 363, 365, 323, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, petitioner along with other co-accused persons are alleged to have kidnapped and assaulted the minor son of the informant when he had gone to purchase some goods from neighbour grocery.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that the alleged occurrence took place on 20.02.2024 and the victim returned himself on 21.02.2024 but the F.I.R. was lodged on 22.02.2024 without any plausible
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.38934 of 2024(4) dt.26-07-2024 2/2 explanation. Petitioner is running a furniture shop and due to some dispute with respect to purchase of furniture by the relative of the informant this false case has been lodged by the informant to implicate the petitioner. In the F.I.R., informant has not mentioned about any demand of extortion and statement of victim in this regard is not only false but after thought. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. He is ready to co-operate in the trial. He is in custody since 24.02.2024. There is no chance of tampering with the evidence or absconding of the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner.
6. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the parties, facts and circumstances of the case and period of custody, let the petitioner, named above, be enlarged on bail upon furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned concerned Court where the case is pending in connection with Bypass P.S. Case No. 74 of 2024. (Sunil Dutta Mishra, J) rakhi/- U T