Chotu @ Shivam v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.21928 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -212 Year- 2013 Thana -ALAMGANJ District- PATNA ======================================================

1. Chotu @ Shivam. S/o Manoj Kumar. R/o Gandhar, P.S.- Ghoshi, Distt.- Jehanabad, at present A/38, Sachivalya Colony, Kankarbagh, P.S.- Patrkar Nagar, Distt.- Patna.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amresh Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Dilip Kumar(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 21-09-2015 Heard both sides.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 364-A and other sections of the Indian Penal Code.

The petitioner is of course, not named in the First Information Report but the petitioner was arrested in a case registered under different sections of the Arms Act. The petitioner is said to have confessed his guilt and, thereafter, the petitioner disclosed that the victims Abhay Singh and Chandrakant Singh were kidnapped in Purnea in a hotel; pursuant thereto, the victims along with the accused persons were arrested. It is submitted that the victim himself had got criminal antecedent. He had taken money from different persons and the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.21928 of 2015 (4) dt.21-09-2015 P2/2 victim went to Purnea to settle the dispute but from perusal of the case diary it appears that after confession of the petitioner, the statement of the petitioner led to the recovery of both the victims from a hotel in Purnea.

Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail in connection with Alamganj P.S. Case No 212/2013. Accordingly, the same is rejected.

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and hold the same on day-to-day basis so that the trial may be concluded within one year from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the trial is not concluded, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Saif/- U T