Pankaj Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.63119 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2019 Thana- JAIPUR District- Banka ====================================================== PANKAJ KUMAR S/O KAMALESH KUMAR @ KAMLESH KUMAR SAXENA Resident of Bandh, 35, P.S.- Sajeti, District- Kanpur Nagar, Uttar Pradesh 208001 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr. Ram Naresh Ray, A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 25-03-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

Let the defect(s), if any, be removed within a period of four weeks after complete start of the physical Court. The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 386, 384, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 18.09.2021, is a person with clean antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted. The informant alleges that on 20.11.2019 he was threatened on his mobile no. 6207991584 from mobile no. 7398657923 to pay an extortion of Rs.6,00,000/- if he wanted to be alive. Further, on 21.11.2019, again the informant received a

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63119 of 2021(2) dt.25-03-2022 2/3 call from the said mobile number threatening him to pay Rs.3,50,000/-.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case as the number from which the threatening call came belonged to the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner works as an electrician in power plant at Ghatampur, Kanpur district, Uttar Pradesh and the petitioner had lost his SIM but did not inform the police, though he had informed the telecom company but for some reason his SIM was not blocked. Learned counsel next submits that it absolutely does not stand to reason that a person working in a private company would indulge in an extortion and that too by calling from his own mobile. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner has the made a victim of the circumstance.

Learned A.P.P. for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody, is a person with clean antecedent and charge-sheet has been submitted and taking into consideration the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, let the petitioner above named be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.63119 of 2021(2) dt.25-03-2022 3/3 Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below where the case is pending in connection with Jaipur P.S. Case No. 86 of 2019.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Kundan/- U T