Kamlesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.25316 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -541 Year- 2014 Thana -GAYA MUFFSIL District- GAYA ====================================================== Kamlesh Kumar Son of Lakho Sao Resident of Village - Nauranga, P.S. Muffasil, District - Gaya.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pranaya Shanker Sinha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Anuradha Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 23-07-2015 The petitioner is in custody since 31.12.2014 in Muffassil (Gaya) P.S. Case No.541 of 2014 (G.R. No.6051/14) for the offence under Section 365 of the I.P.C.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 22.11.2014 at about 9 P.M. the son of the informant, namely, Kundan Kumar, along with Suresh Yadav was coming on his motor cycle after closing his mobile shop and when they reached 50 yards ahead of Nauranga, 3-4 unknown persons came down from their Bolero, intercepted son of the informant and forcibly took away in their Bolero. The informant could not find his son. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.25316 of 2015 (2) dt.23-07-2015 2/2 he has been falsely implicated in this case who is in custody since 31.12. 2014 and charge sheet has been submitted in this case. The petitioner has got no criminal antecedent.

On behalf of the State it has been submitted that the victim has named this petitioner in his statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

On behalf of the State it has been submitted that the petitioner's name has come in course of investigation. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same within a period of nine months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. (Sudhir Singh, J) AnilKrSinha/- U T