Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19440 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -306 Year- 2014 Thana -SHERGHATI District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Rajesh Kumar son of Late Sukhdeo Singh resident of village- Kosama, P.S.- Dobhi, District- Gaya .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.20265 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -306 Year- 2014 Thana -SHERGHATI District- GAYA ======================================================

1. Arvind Kumar Verma s/o Ram Ratan Mahto @ Ram Jatan Prasad r/o village Mahkampur, p.s. Barachaty Distt Gaya. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

(In Cr.Misc. No.19440 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Paras Nath, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sanjay Kr.Tiwary 1(App) (In Cr.Misc. No.20265 of 2015) For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Shivendra Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Ansuaiya Jaiswal (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 25-06-2015 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the State.

The petitioners are languishing in custody since 12.01.2015 and 15.01.2015 in a case registered for the offences punishable under section 386 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17 of the CLA Act.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19440 of 2015 (3) dt.25-06-2015 2/2 Accusation is of demanding extortion through mobile from the construction company. The name of the petitioners sprang up on the confession of apprehended coaccused. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned order reflects that the mobile number through which the extortion was demanded belongs to the petitioner Rajesh Kumar, which has been denied by the petitioners by making statement at paragraph 8 of the petition. Moreover, the entire case diary does not contain any seizure list. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner Arvind Kumar Verma that neither any recovery has been made from the petitioner nor he is in any way connected with the alleged mobile number through which the extortion was made.

Considering the aforesaid fact, let the above named petitioners be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sherghati Gaya in connection with Sherghati P.S. Case No. 306 of 2014.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Ashwini/- U T