Kundan Singh @ Kundan Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.81990 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-309 Year-2014 Thana- ROSERA District- Samastipur ====================================================== KUNDAN SINGH @ KUNDAN KUMAR SINGH Son of Late Ramchandra Singh @ Ramchandra Singh Resident of Mohalla - Dhab, Rosera, P.S.- Rosera, District - Samastipur ... ... Petitioner

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinay Kumar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Manoj Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR MISHRA ORAL ORDER 08-07-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State through video conferencing. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Rosera P.S. Case no. 309 of 2014, registered under Sections 384 and 387 of the Indian Penal Code. The accusation is that at about 6.30 P.M. on 10.10.2014, Kundan Singh (Petitioner) along with his friend, boarding on motorcycle, came at the shop of informant Bhola Sahu and made demand ransom of Rs. Five Lakh and he also told that earlier, on two occasions, letters had been sent to him for the aforesaid demand, but the aforesaid demand had not been fulfilled and he also gave threatening to kill him along with his family members and removed from the shop and land. The shop of the informant is situated at Gudri Bazar near

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81990 of 2019(4) dt.08-07-2020 2/3 Neemtala Chitrapanjir temple, Rosera in the name of Maa Kanyadan Jewelers. It is alleged that the occurrence is taken place since the purchase of the said land.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the resident of adjacent mohalla, where the shop of the informant is situated. Further submission is that, in fact, petitioner had purchased jewellery from the shop of the informant and when he went there for changing the same, the informant was not ready and only to give pressure to not change the jewellery, purchased by the petitioner, the informant lodged the present case. It would appear from the case diary, which is up to paragraph No. 48, that none of the witnesses present nearby the shop of the informant has supported the prosecution case and they have only stated that informant had disclosed that ransom was demanded.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned 1st Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rosera in connection with Rosera P.S. Case

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.81990 of 2019(4) dt.08-07-2020 3/3 No. 309 of 2014, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. One of the sureties must be parents/close relative of the petitioner.

(Rajendra Kumar Mishra, J) manish/- U T