Raushan Kumar Paswan @ Raushan Paswan v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.56439 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-185 Year-2021 Thana- FATEHPUR District- Gaya ====================================================== Raushan Kumar Paswan @ Raushan Paswan S/o Surendra Paswan Resident of Powerganj, Bairagi, Bairagi- 2, Gaya. At presently Residing at VillageIshari Bara, P.S.- Muffasil, District- Gaya. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the Informant :

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

Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 23-02-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the informant and Mr. Md. Matloob Rab, learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Fatehpur P.S. Case No. 185 of 2021 instituted for the offences under Sections 364A, 365 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 09.06.2021, charge-sheet has been submitted in the case and he has antecedent of one case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the informant alleges that on 07.06.2021, at 10.00 am his son (victim) went to Gaya market for some important work but at 3.10 pm, the informant received a ransom call of Rs. 2,50,000/-

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56439 of 2021(2) dt.23-02-2022 2/3 to be paid at Gaya Railway Station on the pretext that the victim has been kidnapped, further about 15 days back, one Chandan Kumar had threatened to kidnap and kill his son. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R., he has been falsely implicated in the present case, the victim has been recovered and he has not alleged anything against the petitioner in his statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. except the fact that petitioner was an associate of Karu Singh.

Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that the ransom call received by the informant was from the mobile of the victim, accordingly the police acted swiftly and started taking location of the mobile of the victim and thereafter while taking the ransom money, the petitioner along with Karu Singh was arrested and the child was also recovered from the vicinity from where the petitioner was arrested.

Learned A.P.P. for the State also vehemently opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submits that even the victim after recovery in his statement under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. has stated that the petitioner was an associate of Karu Singh, as such it appears that a gang is working which is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.56439 of 2021(2) dt.23-02-2022 3/3 involved in kidnapping and demanding ransom.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the informant and learned A.P.P. for the State, the Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. His prayer for bail is thus rejected.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T