Pankaj Upadhyay @ Pankaj Upadhya v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43466 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-542 Year-2023 Thana- SAHPUR District- Bhojpur ====================================================== Pankaj Upadhyay @ Pankaj Upadhya Son of Shiv Kishore Upadhyay @ Shiv Kishor Upadhyay @ Shiv Kishore Upadhya Resident of Village- Chhotaki Nainijore, P.S.- Nainijore, District- Buxar ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. P.N. Shahi, Sr. Advocate Mr. Vijay Shankar Upadhyay, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER 03-09-2025 Heard the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Shahpur P.S. Case No. 542 of 2023 registered for the offence under Sections 364(A)/411 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-B)a, 26 & 35 of the Arms Act.

3. The petitioner and others are accused of kidnapping the victim and demanding Rs. 5 Lakhs as ransom.

4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. It is further submitted that the name of this petitioner has surfaced in the confessional statement of co-accused namely Ayush. In this case, all the victims have given their statements under

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.43466 of 2025(3) dt.03-09-2025 2/2 Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. Jitendra Pathak, one of the victims, has stated that Kuldeep arrived with seven persons and kidnapped him. He has stated that Ramakant Ojha has told his friends that if anybody comes, they would kill him. Admittedly, Rs. 75,000/- was received in the bank account of Kuldeep. It is also submitted that the main thrust of the allegation is against Kuldeep. It is further submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 09.04.2025.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

6. Considering the fact that the petitioner is involved in the kidnapping of the victim for ransom, this Court is not inclined to grant regular bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this application for regular bail stands rejected.

Shishir/- (Sandeep Kumar, J) U