Arjun Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.48702 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-290 Year-2021 Thana- JHAJHA District- Jamui ====================================================== ARJUN SINGH SON OF LATE MATHURA SINGH R/O VILLAGEDUMARHAR, P.S.- JHAJHA, DISTRICT- JAMUI ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Prabhat Ranjan Singh For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Umanath Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 23-12-2022 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State.
The petitioner seeks regular bail in connection with Jhajha P.S. Case No. 290/2021, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 386/387/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution in brief, according to the informant, is that he had received a letter on 26.9.2021, demanding ransom and then, some persons had called him on his mobile-phone and demanded money, whereafter, the informant has asked the caller to come to his house and take the money. It is further alleged that thereafter, two persons, who
2/4 had covered their faces and put a tape over the registration number of their motorcycle, had arrived at the house of the informant, where they were caught by the villagers and upon enquiry, they had disclosed their names as Arjun (petitioner herein) and Ranjeet Yadav. Upon interrogation, they had disclosed that they are commanders of zonal committee of MCC.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he is languishing in custody since 3.10.2021. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that though the petitioner is an accused in two other cases, of the year 2004 and of the 2005, however, he is on bail in both the said two cases. It is further submitted that the petitioner had gone to the house of the informant for collecting the dues amount, which was outstanding for payment, pertaining to freight of the tractor hired by the informant. It is also submitted that it is unbelievable that
3/4 ransom amount of only Rs. 1500/- would be demanded from the Informant.
Per contra, the learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the materials available on record as also considering the fact that neither any money has changed hands nor the signature of the petitioner on the letter, alleged to have been delivered to the informant demanding ransom, has stood authenticated, apart from the fact that the petitioner is languishing in custody since 3.10.2021 and since past 17 years, he has not been implicated in any criminal case, I deem it fit and proper to direct for release of the petitioner on regular bail. Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
4/4 satisfaction of learned CJM, Munger in connection with Jhajha P.S. Case No. 290 of 2021.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Ajay/- U T