This order rejected the petitioner's bail application in a kidnapping case under Section 364(A) IPC. The court noted the victim identified the petitioner and refused bail, directing the trial court to expedite trial within a year.
Bail application rejected; trial directed to be concluded within one year.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.10908 of 2015
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -309 Year- 2013 Thana -KAHALGAON District- BHAGALPUR ====================================================== 1. Anil Kumar @ Guddu Kumar Son of Bhagwan Mandal @ Bhaggo Mandal Resident of village- Tapua Gyanwati P.S. Ekchari District Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mrs. Pravina Kumari, Advocate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER
The petitioner seeks bail in Kahalgaon P.S. Case No. 309 of 2013, registered for the offences punishable under Section 364(A) and other Sections of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioner is alleged to have kidnapped the victim Suman Kumar.
It is submitted that Siromani Devi who the kingpin of the crime has already been granted bail vide order passed in Cr. Misc. No. 53840 of 2013. No test identification parade was held. The victim himself disclosed the name of the petitioner and other accused persons.
It appears that the victim disclosed the entire manner of his kidnapping and also disclosed the name of the petitioner along
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.10908 of 2015 (3) dt.03-04-2015
2/2
with other accused persons. The victim did not disclose that the Siromani Devi kidnapped him rather he disclosed that the petitioner and others kidnapped him and demanded ransom for his release.
Considering the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner above named on bail at this stage. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within one year from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.)
KKSINHA/-
U T
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner deserves bail in a kidnapping case where the victim identified him despite no TID parade.
Whether the bail application should be allowed given that the alleged kingpin had already been granted bail.
Anil Kumar @ Guddu Kumar
The State of Bihar
Prabhat Kumar Jha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
