Md Yejaj @ Yejaj Alam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.45988 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-11 Year-2024 Thana- SUGAULI RAIL P.S. District- West Champaran ====================================================== Md Yejaj @ Yejaj Alam Son of Md. Wazir Mian R/O Vill- Bari Tola, Ward no.- 32, P.S.- Bettiah (Mufassil), Dist- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Bimlesh Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Lakshmi Kant Sharma, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA ORAL ORDER 27-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. Perused the case diary.

2.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with GRP Sugauli (Bettiah) P.S. Case No. 11 of 2024 instituted for the offence under Sections 363, 365 of the Indian Penal Code in which charge sheet has been submitted for the offence under Section 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3.

As per prosecution case, the accusation against the petitioner is of abducting the brother of the Informant as well as demanding ransom of Rs. 1,00,000/- from the Informant. 4.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is in custody since 20-02-2024. Petitioner is a man of clean antecedent.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45988 of 2024(3) dt.27-09-2024 2/3 5.

It has been further submitted by the petitioner's counsel that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. Petitioner is not named in the FIR. Name of the petitioner has transpired during course of investigation. He further submits that neither the petitioner has kidnapped the victim nor has made any demand of ransom. The victim has also not been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. He further submits that nothing incriminating has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. No ransom amount has been paid by the informant either to the petitioner or to anybody else. Even no harm is alleged to have been caused to the victim. The informant is not the eye-witness to the alleged occurrence. There is even no other witness to the alleged occurrence. Other co-accused has been enlarged on regular bail by this Court vide order dated 18-09-2024, passed in Cr. Misc. No. 47267 of 2024. 6.

Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. It is submitted that offence alleged against the petitioner is serious in nature and, thus, they do not deserve bail.

7.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, period of custody of the petitioner, clean antecedent of the petitioner and charge sheet being submitted, this Court is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.45988 of 2024(3) dt.27-09-2024 3/3 inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

8.

Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Court below/concerned Court in connection with GRP Sugauli (Bettiah) P.S. Case No. 11 of 2024, subject to the following conditions:

(I) One of the bailors shall be own/close member of the family of the petitioner.

(II) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date fixed at the trial. In case of default in such appearance on two consecutive dates, the Trial Court will have liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

(Rudra Prakash Mishra, J) Raj Kishore/- U