Dhananjay Prasad v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18732 of 2017 (2) dt.16-05-2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.18732 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -324 Year- 2015 Thana -BIHTA District- PATNA ====================================================== Dhananjay Prasad, S/o Ram Ratan Yadav @ Ram Ratan Singh, R/o VillageAnandpur, P.S.- Bihta, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pranav Kumar For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Kumar Ranjit Ranjan ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 16-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel representing the State.

The petitioner seeks bail in connection with Bihta P.S. Case No. 324 of 2015 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 387, 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegedly, the petitioner after breaking the lock of the truck started fleeing away with the truck and when Anil Kumar the brother of the informant on motorcycle tried to stop the truck, then the petitioner dashed his motorcycle with truck causing death of Anil Kumar and the motorcycle was badly damaged. The occurrence has been caused due to non-fulfillment of demand of extortion amount of Rs. 80,000/-.

Submission is of false implication and that co-accused Uday Kumar has been allowed bail vide Cr. Misc. No. 17740 of 2017 by another co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioner is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18732 of 2017 (2) dt.16-05-2017 in custody since 20.11.2016, Dy. S.P. in his supervision note has not found the story of extortion to be true and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration. Learned APP opposes the prayer of bail by submitting that the case of the petitioner is on differing forting that of co-accused Uday Kumar and the petitioner is responsible for dashing the motorcycle of the deceased due to which the deceased died on the spot.

In the facts and circumstances stated above, considering the allegation attributed against the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail, accordingly, his such prayer stands rejected.

(Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) avin/- U T