Kaushal Kumar Jha @ Manohar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9836 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-566 Year-2020 Thana- BETTIAH CITY District- West Champaran ====================================================== Kaushal Kumar Jha @ Manohar Son Of Arun Kumar Jha Resident Of Banu Chhapar, Ward No. 07, P.S. Bettiah Mufassil Banu Chhapar O.P., DistrictWest Champaran. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amit Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Nawal Kishore Pd. APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 24-06-2021 This matter is taken up for consideration through Video Conferencing under the orders of Hon'ble the Chief Justice.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P for the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in Bettiah Town P.S. Case No. 566 of 2020, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 385, 387, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, this petitioner is alleged to have demanded ransom of Rs. 20 lakh from the informant through mobile no. 9507983357. It is further alleged that this petitioner also abused the informant and extended threat to kill him and his family members, if the demand is not fulfilled.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9836 of 2021(2) dt.24-06-2021 2/2 It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner has committed no offence and has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner is mentally sick and he is under treatment. Petitioner bears clean antecedent and he is in custody since 11.09.2020.

Learned APP however, vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that during course of investigation, it has come that the mobile which was used in demanding ransom belongs to this petitioner and CDR also shows that call was made at midnight for demand of ransom.

Considering the facts aforesaid and the nature of allegation, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner abovenamed on bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) vinita/- U T