Rajesh Rai @ Rajesh Kumar Yadav @ Ajit Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.34006 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -45 Year- 2013 Thana -RAJPUR DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== Rajesh Rai @ Rajesh Kumar Yadav @ Ajit Kumar @ Rajesh Kumar .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Umesh Chandra Verma For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Surendra Pd.Singh (App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 10-11-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P.

The petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offences punishable under section 387 of the Indian penal Code. Allegedly ransom of Rs. 10, 00000/- was demanded on mobile from Dr. Rajesh Kumar Singh causing life threatening and the caller said that he was shooter of Bablu Dubey. During the investigation the petitioner was apprehended and he confessed his guilt.

Submission is that admittedly no payment was made and except confession there is nothing on the record. The petitioner has been roped in several cases only on suspicion and in most of the cases he is on bail.

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.34006 of 2015 (3) dt.10-11-2015 2/2 The learned A.P.P. submits that the petitioner is veteran criminal and according to his own statement he is involved in 16 more cases.

In the facts and circumstances stated above and considering that except confession and criminal antecedent of the petitioner there is nothing against the petitioner and as such the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of Shri Uma Shankar , Judicial magistrate, Sikarhana east Champapran at Motihari in Rajepur P.S. Case No. 45 of 2013, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail. (Jitendra Mohan Sharma, J) M.Rahman/- U T