Mritunjay Singh @ Amit v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.51664 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -420 Year- 2006 Thana -KADAMKUAN District- PATNA ======================================================
1. Mritunjay Singh @ Amit son of Sri Ram Kumar Singh resident of Village Aodhma, Police Station Shekhpura, (Sirari), District Shekhpura. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Viveka Nand Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nand Kishore Pd.(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 09-02-2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State. The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kadamkuan (Patrakar Nagar) P.S. case No. 420/ 2006 registered for the offences punishable under sections 364(A), 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Allegedly, Vinit Kumar, younger brother of the informant, was missing since 13.05.2006 and this information was given to Patrakar Nagar police station on 17.05.2006. On 22.05.2006 from the mobile of Vinit ransom of Rs. 20 lac was demanded and then on the basis of written application first information report was registered. During the investigation, name of the petitioner and other accused transpired and the victim was
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51664 of 2015 (4) dt.09-02-2016 2/3 also released and his statement has been recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner was arrested in Hathidah P.S. case No. 5/ 2002 on 04.05.2009 and he has been remanded in this case on 29.05.2009 without any material, the victim has not stated anything against the petitioner in his statement under section 164 of the Cr. P.C. and only on suspicion he is suffering in custody, charges have already been framed but up till now no prosecution witness has been examined and in near future the trial is not likely to be concluded. Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that petitioner was in contact with other co-accused from his mobile.
In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the detention of the petitioner and further in near future the trial is not likely to be concluded, as such, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on execution of bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge -IX, Patna in connection with Sessions Trial No. 1458 of 2011 arising out of Kadamkuan (Patrakar Nagar) P.S.
case No.420/2006, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.51664 of 2015 (4) dt.09-02-2016 3/3 be near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) BKS/- U T