Kamlesh Yadav @ Laden @ Laddu @ Kamlesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.66092 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1117 Year-2019 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ====================================================== Kamlesh Yadav @ Laden @ Laddu @ Kamlesh Kumar Son Of Bhuneswar Yadav R/O Village- Benipur, P.S.- Rupau (O.P.), District- Nawada. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ranjay Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 19-07-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case instituted for the offence under Sections 363 and 364A of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per prosecution case, the informant alleges that some unknown persons kidnapped his son namely, Lakshman (Lucky), when his son went outside from his house for playing.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He has committed no offence. Petitioner is not named in the FIR and the his name transpired on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Chintu Kumar @ Chintu Yadav. The victim boy has recovered and his statement recorded u/s 164 of the Cr.P.C., in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.66092 of 2022(4) dt.19-07-2023 2/2 which he stated that co-accused Chintu Kumar, who is the neighbour called him on road, thereafter two persons including petitioner taken him on hill side thereafter, seeing the police party they left him. He further submitted that the motive behind abduction will be demand of ransom by the petitioner and others but no ransom money has been executed. The victim boy has not recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. He is languishing in judicial custody since 29.07.2022.

5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as period of custody, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Court concerned in connection with Nawada P.S. Case No. 1117 of 2019.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) arish/- U T