Sujit Bhandari Vs The State of Bihar

====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Krishna Murari, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Nitya Nand Tiwary, APP ======================================================

¶10

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RUDRA PRAKASH MISHRA

¶11

ORAL ORDER

¶12

6 14-11-2025

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.

¶14

The petitioner seeks bail in connectin with Bela P.S. Case No. 23 of 2023, instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 364(A), 34, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

The prosecution case, in short, is that on 11.01.2023, informant’s son along with his friends had gone by motorcycle in the border area of Bela Police Station but, his son did not return. On interrogation, co-accused Krishna Pandit disclosed that his son and Rohit Kumar have been kidnapped by some other accused persons. Subsequently, the informant received a mobile call demanding ransom amount of Rs. 20,00,000/-.

¶16

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33034 of 2025(6) dt.14-11-2025 2/4

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. Charge-sheet has been submitted in this case. No incriminating material has been recovered from the conscious possession of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that no any specific allegation has been attributed against the petitioner rather the same is general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that there is delay of ten days in lodging the FIR without any plausible explanation. Name of the petitioner has transpired in this case on the basis of disclosure made by co-accused, namely, Krishna Pandit and the same has got no evidentiary value. The petitioner is in custody since 05.10.2023 and has got seven criminal antecedents.

¶18

Learned APP for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner and submits that coaccused Ajay Kumar confessed his guilt and admitted his complicity along with complicity of the petitioner and others and has also admitted that he along with other co-accused persons including the petitioner have committed kidnapping for ransom of the son of the informant and Rohit Kumar and committed their murder and hide the dead body in the orchard. He further submits that on the information of the accused

¶19

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.33034 of 2025(6) dt.14-11-2025 3/4

¶20

persons including the present petitioner and the co-accused Ajay Kumar, the dead body of the deceased Vishnu Prasad Sah and Rohit Kumar were recovered. It is further submitted that chargesheet has been submitted against the petitioner under Sections 364(A), 302, 120(B), 201.34 of the Indian Penal Code. There is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the privilege of bail.

¶21

On perusal of the report sent by learned Court below, it transpires that charge has been framed against the petitioner, the trial is in progress and at present, the case is running for the prosecution evidence.

¶22

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, nature of accusation and the gravity of the offence, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.

¶23

The prayer is rejected. The trial Court is directed to expedite the Trial.

¶24

The District Magistrate, Sitamarhi and the Superintendent of Police, Sitamarhi are also directed to take necessary steps to produce the witnesses on the date fixed in the Trial Court so that the trial could be concluded within the stipulated period.

¶25