Naveen Kumar Singh @ Naveen Kumar Thakur v. State Of Bihar And ANR

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.803 of 2016 (05) dt.30-03-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.803 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -81 Year- 2016 Thana -BAHADURPUR District- DARBHANGA ====================================================== Naveen Kumar Singh @ Naveen Kumar Thakur, son of Dhrub Narayan Thakur, Resident of Village- Amritpur Benua, P.S.- Tajpur, DistrictSamastipur. .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Sabal Kumar Jha -Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Binay Krishna-S.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI ORAL ORDER 30-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor.

There was demand of ransom by two SIM Numbers and further, the miscreants came over Scorpio to the place of informant and procured Rs.10,000/-, directing with regard to remaining amount, further directed to talk on Sunday. The written report also speaks that the call was made by one Rajiv Mishra. Furthermore, it has also been narrated that the aforesaid Rajiv Mishra had directed to see WhatsApp (Video has been procured) wherefrom three persons have been found duly armed with deadly weapons.

Appellant was apprehended and from his possession, the aforesaid two SIM Numbers have been recovered.

Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.803 of 2016 (05) dt.30-03-2017 Furthermore, it has been pin-pointed by the witnesses that he happens to be the person, who had procured Rs.10,000/-. Appellant has got criminal antecedent.

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that Rajiv Mishra is co-villager of informant with whom land dispute is going on. Furthermore, he has been falsely implicated. On the other hand, learned Special Public Prosecutor opposed the prayer.

From the case diary, apart from recovery of the aforesaid SIM Number, the video has also been gone through call details which was recorded, has been incorporated under Paragraphs-132 and 133 of the case diary. After perusal of the same, it is evident that the assertion whatever been made by the informant is found duly substantiated.

Accordingly, prayer for bail is rejected.

(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) Vikash/- U T