Kumar Saurav @ Kanhai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.86996 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1353 Year-2023 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== Kumar Saurav @ Kanhai, S/O Chandra Bhushan Singh @ Chandra Bhushan Prasad Singh, R/O Village- Athri Gorgatta Tola, P.S.- Runnisaidpur, DistrictSitamarhi. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shivam, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mrs.Nirmala Kumari, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 31-01-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Sessions Trial No. 391 of 2024, arising out of Ahiyapur P.S. Case No. 1353 of 2023, registered for the alleged offence under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and later on, Section 364(A) IPC was added.

3. As per prosecution case, the allegation against the petitioner is kidnapping of a minor child for ransom.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this is second attempt of the petitioner to seek bail from this Court. Earlier, the prayer for bail of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 03.05.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.15946 of

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86996 of 2024(3) dt.31-01-2025 2/3 2024. The learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is in custody since 20.10.2023 and trial has not proceeded further in the case. The learned counsel further submits that the witnesses on the seizure list are from Muzaffarpur, whereas the seizure list has been prepared in the district of Sitamarhi. The learned counsel further submits that the co-accused person has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 04.04.2024 passed in Cr. Misc. No.21652 of 2024.

5. The learned APP vehemently opposes the submission made on behalf of the petitioner. The learned APP submits that no fresh ground has been brought on record for reconsideration of prayer of bail and the period of custody could not be a ground.

6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submission made on behalf of the parties, I do not find any new ground to reconsider the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Hence, his prayer for grant of bail is rejected.

7. A report dated 15.01.2025 has been received from the learned trial court about the present stage of trial and from the report, it transpires that charges have been framed against the petitioner on 10.07.2024 and, thereafter, matter has been coming at the stage of prosecution evidence, but no witness has

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.86996 of 2024(3) dt.31-01-2025 3/3 been examined in this case till date. The learned trial court submitted that the trial is likely to be concluded within next six months.

8. The learned trial court is reminded of its undertaking and directed to conclude the trial within the stipulated period.

9. At the same time, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Muzaffarpur is directed to ensure the presence of prosecution witnesses on the dates fixed before the learned trial court. In case, the Senior Superintendent of Police fails to produce the witnesses on the dates fixed, he will be called before this Court to explain the circumstances. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) V.K.Pandey/- U T