Anil Sahani v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.67091 of 2018 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-237 Year-2018 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Anil Sahani Son of Ramesh Sahani, R/o Village- Mirzapur, P.S.-Rosera, District - Samastipur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Jagdhar Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Awadhesh Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA JAISWAL ORAL ORDER 13-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

Petitioner seeks bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 385, 387, 504 and 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Extortion money of Rs.15 lacs is said to have been demanded from the informant by mobile thrice by some unknown miscreant.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. No incriminating article has been recovered from his conscious physical possession. He has no concern with the aforesaid occurrence. His confessional statement recorded by the police under

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.67091 of 2018(3) dt.13-02-2019 2/2 coercion is not admissible in evidence and barring the aforesaid confessional statement, there is nothing in the record indicating the complicity of the petitioner in the occurrence. Petitioner has been languishing in custody since 16.07.2018. Per Contra, learned APP for the State opposing the bail petition submitted that mobile no. 9776448428 used in demanding the extortion money was used by the mobile having IMEI Nos. 866406028437490 and 911978350197250 which is standing in the name of the petitioner as evident from the CDR report and coupled with it the petitioner has also confessed his guilt in the occurrence. Hence the petitioner does not deserve bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

(Prakash Chandra Jaiswal, J) mantreshwar/- U T