Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Sah v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66620 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-124 Year-2024 Thana- RAXAUL District- East Champaran ====================================================== 1.
Rakesh Kumar @ Rakesh Sah Son of Kanhaiyalal Sah @ Kanhaiya Sah Resident of Village- Bada Pareuwa, P.S.- Raxaul, District -East Champaran 2.
Mukesh Kumar @ Mukesh Sah Son of Kanhaiyalal Sah @ Kanhaiya Sah Resident of Village- Bada Pareuwa, P.S.- Raxaul, District -East Champaran 3.
Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Kumar Ram @ Rahul Ram Son of Ashok Ram Resident of Village- Haraiya, P.S.- Raxaul, District -East Champaran 4.
Rahul Kumar Son of Ramakant Mahto Resident of Village- Haraiya, P.S.- Raxaul, District -East Champaran 5.
Suraj Kumar Son of Ashok Sah Resident of Village- Haraiya, P.S.- Raxaul, District -East Champaran 6.
Narayan Patel @ Narayan Kumar Son of Sunil Prasad Resident of VillageHaraiya, P.S.- Raxaul, District -East Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Patanjali Rishi, Adv.
For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Zainul Abedin, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 18-01-2025 Heard learned Advocate for the petitioners and the learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in connection with Raxaul P.S. Case No. 124 of 2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 387, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is of abducting the informant on the gun point and demanding a
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66620 of 2024(3) dt.18-01-2025 2/3 ransom of Rs. 2 lakhs. It is further alleged that the petitioners have also assaulted the informant by confining him in a room and further made a demand of Rs. 5 lakhs or to execute a sale deed of his land in their favour.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that in fact, the petitioner no. 1 owns a videography shop and other petitioners are his employees and due to an altercation regarding involvement of the informant, who is a resident of the matrimonial home of the petitioner no. 1 in wreckage of marriage negotiations of the sister-in-law of the the petitioner no. 1, the informant has instituted this case. The injury sustained to the informant found to be simple in nature. Moreover, there is neither any transfer of the money in favour of any of the petitioners nor there is any cogent material in support of the allegation. The petitioners bear fair antecedent and they undertake that they will fully cooperate in the investigation as well as in the proceeding of the Court.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the bail application and submits that serious allegation of demand of ransom has been levelled against the petitioenrs.
6. Regard being had to the submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the omnibus nature of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66620 of 2024(3) dt.18-01-2025 3/3 allegation coupled with the fair antecedent of the petitioners, let the petitioners above named be released on bail, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, upon furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Raxaul in connection with Raxaul P.S. Case No. 124 of 2024, subject to the conditions laid down in Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. with the further conditions that:
(i) one of the bailors shall be the own/close family members of the petitioners.
(ii) further in case the petitioners found indulge in such kind of activities in future, the informant shall be at liberty to file an appropriate case before the Jurisdictional court below (Harish Kumar, J.) Jyoti Kumari/- U T