Umesh Pujhar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.84680 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-79 Year-2019 Thana- BAUNSI District- Banka ====================================================== Umesh Pujhar S/O Tentu Pujhar Resident of - Raksa Rirhiya , P.SRarhiya,Dist- Deogarh (Jharkhand) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Uday Chand Prasad, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY ORAL ORDER 15-12-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for regular bail in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 364(A) and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The case of the prosecution in short is that the son of the informant was kidnapped for the ransom. During course of investigation, the victim has given his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein he has named only Sher Singh and Vishal, who were identified due to calling of the accused persons by their name.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the name of this petitioner has surfaced in this case on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused Bhairo Prasad

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.84680 of 2025(2) dt.15-12-2025 2/2 Yadav @ Bhairo Yadav. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said Bhairo Prasad Yadav @ Bhairo Yadav has been granted bail by the learned Co-ordinate Bench vide Cr. Misc. No. 28130 of 2020. The case of this petitioner stands on similar footing. It has further been submitted that the victim himself has not identified this petitioner in his statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 08.07.2024.

5. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State has vehemently opposed the bail.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this court is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail in connection with S.T. NO. 435 of 2024 arising out of Bounsi P.S. Case No. 79 of 2019 on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-III, Banka. (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) durgesh/- U T