Babu Keshav Kumar @ Keshav Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.10724 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -22 Year- 2016 Thana -RATANPURA District- SUPAUL ======================================================

1. Babu Keshav Kumar @ Keshav Kumar S/o Mahendra Yadav, R/o Village- Lalmanpatti Kohwara, P.S.- Ratanpura, District- Supaul. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amar Prakash For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Anita Kumari ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 27-02-2018 The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Ratanpura P.S. Case No. 22 of 2016, registered for offences punishable under Sections 384, 386, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(A) of I.T. Act.

Allegation against the petitioner and others is of demand of ransom from the informant.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that he has not been named in the F.I.R. and has falsely been implicated in this case and the impugned order itself shows that he has been made accused only on the basis of suspicion. Further petitioner is a student and has no criminal antecedent.

Heard learned A.P.P. also.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of offence and also that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and only general and omnibus allegation has been levelled against him, let the petitioner

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10724 of 2018 (2) dt.27-02-2018 2/2 above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000 (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Birpur (Supaul), in connection with Ratanpura P.S. Case No. 22 of 2016, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(i) One of the bailors of the petitioner shall be a local person having sufficient immovable property within the jurisdiction of the concerned Court.

(ii) The petitioner shall cooperate in the investigation and make himself available as and when required by the police and on the event of failure on his part two appear before the police on two consecutive dates without showing any genuine reasons, the prosecution is free to move for cancellation of his bail bonds.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunil/- U T