Sonu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.39217 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-13 Year-2023 Thana- MURLIGANJ District- Madhepura ====================================================== SONU KUMAR Son of Arun Kumar Yadav @ Arun Yadav Resident of village- Haripur Kala, ward no. 08, P.S. - Murliganj, Distt. - Madhepura ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shailendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Arun Kumar Pandey ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 07-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Murliganj P.S. Case No. 13 of 2023, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 324, 307, 379, 420, 504 and 506/34 of the IPC.

As per FIR, it is alleged that all the accused persons including the petitioner assaulted the informant and snatched his mobile, ATM card, PAN card and Green card and fraudulently transferred ₹ 2,61,000/- from the account of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the alleged money has not been deposited in the bank account of the petitioner, though, the same

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39217 of 2023(2) dt.07-07-2023 2/3 has been deposited in the account of co-accused Papu Kumar and Ashwini Kumar. It is further submitted that the FIR has been lodged after delay of seven days.

He further submits that the petitioner has been languishing in jail since 12.03.2023.

It has also been stated in paragraph no. 3 of the bail petition that earlier the petitioner is made accused in one other case also.

It is also stated in paragraph no. 2 of the bail petition that the petitioner has not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one.

However, learned APP for the State vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for bail submitting that the petitioner is the main accused, who is instrumental in whole transaction.

Considering the fact that innocent victim has been seriously injured and his money has been fraudulently transferred from his account, this Court is not persuaded to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of nine months. If the trial is not concluded within a period of nine months, the

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.39217 of 2023(2) dt.07-07-2023 3/3 petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. (Jitendra Kumar, J) Amrendra/- U T