Bittu Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1970 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -86 Year- 2016 Thana -SITAMARHI District- SITAMARHI ====================================================== Bittu Jha S/o- Sri Bindeshwar Jha R/o- Dumari Katsari, P.S.- Shayampur Bhatha, District- Sheohar.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Pronati Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 14-02-2017 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P. for the State.

In this application for anticipatory bail the petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Sitamarhi P.S. Case No. 86 of 2016 for the offences punishable under sections 385 and 387 of the I.P.C.

Allegedly, the informant received call from mobile no. 9507067519 and the collar stated his name as Mukesh Pathak speaking from Bihar Peoples Liberation Army and demanded the ransom of Rs. 15,00,000/- from the informant Dr. Nilmani. During investigation name of the petitioner transpires. Submission is of false implication and that there is no legal evidence against the petitioner, except suspicion there is

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1970 of 2017 (3) dt.14-02-2017 2/2 nothing against him and as such the petitioner deserves sympathetic consideration.

The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for pre-arrest bail of the petitioner by submitting that the witnesses, namely, Sanjeev Kumar, Madhusudan Thakur and Manoj Kumar, vide paragraphs8, 9 and 10 of the case diary, have stated the name of the petitioner regarding his involvement also in demanding ransom and further the police has also found involvement of the petitioner, vide paragraph nos. 52 and 55 of the case diary.

In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering that the name of the petitioner has come during investigation and there is sufficient material against him and as such I am not inclined to grant privilege of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner and accordingly his such prayer stands rejected in connection with the aforementioned case pending in the court of C.J.M. Sitamarhi.

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