Manish Kumar @ Manish Prasad Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84649 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-303 Year-2023 Thana- BAHERI District- Darbhanga ====================================================== Manish Kumar @ Manish Prasad Singh Son of Vikneshwar Singh @ Vikneshwar Prasad Singh @ Bikneshwar Prasad Singh Resident of Village - Mattharahi, Police Station- Baheri, District- Darbhanga. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Nilendu Kumar Choudhary, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Rina Sinha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 21-03-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Baheri P.S. Case No. 303 of 2023 for the offence punishable u/s 364A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the prosecution case, the petitioner took the grand son of the informant with him and thereafter a call was received by the mother of the child making ransom demand.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case as he is agnate of the informant and also next door neighbour. The child was recovered within four hours and the person who was taking the child with him was apprehended.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84649 of 2023(3) dt.21-03-2024 2/3 This co-accused used the mobile phone and motorcycle in the occurrence and the petitioner has no relation with the said coaccused Manoj Yadav. The statement of the victim boy was recorded who stated that he went with the petitioner who took him to some hotel of his friend and left him behind. Thereafter, he was taken to some other place by another person from where the said child was rescued. From the statement of the victim boy it is also apparent that the petitioner has no role as the petitioner took the boy to the chowk for recharging the mobile of his mother and thereafter, he has no idea how the child was kidnapped. The petitioner is having clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner who submits that from paragraph Nos. 104 and 105 of the case diary it is evident that the petitioner was in regular touch with the person who was apprehended and the call details report of the mobile phones of these two persons discloses this fact. Moreover it was the petitioner who took the grandson of the informant in the hotel of his friend and conveniently left him behind.

6. In the light of nature of allegation and material available on record, I do not think it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84649 of 2023(3) dt.21-03-2024 3/3

7. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Arun Kumar Jha, J) Prakash/- U