Sonu Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.58731 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -52 Year- 2017 Thana -MURAR District- BUXAR ====================================================== Sonu Singh S/o Late Nanhak Singh, R/o Phaphadar, P.S.- Murar, DistrictBuxar. .... .... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner : Ms. Soni Shrivastava For the Opposite Party : Mr. Sri Indra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR ORAL ORDER 17-01-2018 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State as also the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the informant. Petitioner, already in custody, seeks bail in Murar PS Case No. 52 of 2017 registered under Sections 384, 436, 427, 307, 504 and 506/34 of the IPC.

The allegation in brief is that one Abhay Singh and other accused used to make demand of extortion from the informant and in case of not paying it they set the garage of the informant on fire causing damage to truck, bolero vehicle and other items kept therein and while breaking lock the informant woke up and identified the accused persons including the petitioner.

Submission is that whatever enmity is that is with Abhay Singh and only being related to this petitioner, he has falsely been implicated and there is no allegation of making any demand of extortion against this petitioner. Only allegation is of doing damage to property of the informant and the petitioner is in custody since 21.8.2017. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. However, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the informant submits that the allegation is specific against this

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.58731 of 2017 (4) dt.17-01-2018 petitioner of setting fire in the garage of the informant causing damage and he is also one of the associates of Abhay Singh. The petitioner has also got one antecedent.

Having considered the said facts and circumstances, at present the prayer for bail of the petitioner is refused. The petitioner may renew the prayer for bail after six months. (Arun Kumar, J.) Snkumar/- U T