Amit Kumar Poddar @ Amit Poddar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.5880 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -274 Year- 2017 Thana -BIRAUL District- DARBHANGA ======================================================

1. Amit Kumar Poddar @ Amit Poddar S/o Mantun Poddar, R/o Pokhram, P.S.- Biraul, Distt.- Darbhanga.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Narayan Mahto, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA KUMAR ORAL ORDER 24-04-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is in custody in connection with Biraul P.S. Case No.274 of 2017, a case under Section 364A of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Biraul, Darbhanga.

The FIR of the occurrence of kidnapping of Satyam Kumar Mandal, the minor grand-son of the informant, is against unknown. Thereafter, ransom was demanded for release of the vehicle from the mobile referred in the FIR.

The victim is still traceless. However, before the police the petitioner confessed that he has killed the victim. During investigation it revealed that the said SIM card from which

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.5880 of 2018 (6) dt.24-04-2018 P2/ ransom was demanded was used in the mobile seized from the house of the petitioner also. Paragraphs 29 and 30 of the casediary would reveal that the same SIM was used in different mobiles on different dates. Petitioner is in custody since 25.06.2017.

Learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer on the ground that narco test of the petitioner is under process. Considering the nature of material against the petitioner, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail for the present. Hence, the prayer for bail is refused. The learned trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within nine months, failing which the petitioner would be at liberty to renew the prayer for bail before the trial judge itself, who shall pass a reasoned order.

(Birendra Kumar, J) Mkr./- U T