ySs}ONS JUDGE, BUAGALIUL, 7 “ me) IN. YUE COURS 7 Hall Application No. rrawa003, amas sayullshipur (Goradlli) BS. Cane J sin Amand Kumar Sal Versus State of f Advocate. . «SH A ae Leamed Publlc Prosecutn Counsel for the Petitioner: nah L « Sti Satya Narayan Sah, Puls rer de informant 2 Sel Biresh Prasad Mishra, Advocate Order with Signature of the Court 2 1. This is an application for regular ball {ied on bebalf of the petitioner Anand 16.00.2020 ae Kumar Sab, in connection with Jagdishpur (Goradih) PS, Case* No. ces uly 386, 341, 323, 506 IPC. The petitioner tituted for offei 406/202) is in custody since 00-07-2023, Heard Sri Abhay Kant Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.N.P. Sah, learned Public Prosecutor for the State ably assisted by Sri Biresh| Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the informant. se relly put i that on 06-07-2023, the informant received a | }. Prosecution call on his cell phone, from the petitioner by mobile no. 9204496042, and) n the jurisdiction of By-pass Police, was called near Dutsun showroom, wi Station, It is further stated that after reaching there, the informant was| assaulted by the petitioner, who was also took out a pistol from his waist and| | Hpointed ion the head ofthe informant, took out Rs, 20,000/- from his packet | and asked for a ransom of Rs. 25 lac. It is further alleged that the informant was scared and agreed to pay the ransom amount within two days. It is] further alleged that earlier also the petitioner had visited the hoyse of the} ® informant and asked for ransom, It is next stated in the FIR that the, informant entered into an agreement on 15-07-2022, with the petitioner and other persons, for sale of a piece of land, However, the agreement to sale | could not be honoured within the time period of nine months and, therefore | the informant returned the amount received from the three persons as well as | from the petitioner. The informant returned’ Rs. 13 lac to the petitioner through two cheques details of which has been mentioned in written complaint. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent andComd. 6-5-2023 Bail Application No. 17282023 46 committed no offence. He has f h falsely been implicated in this case, Ie further is i Submits that this is out and out a case of malicious Prosecution, the reason bei on being that after execution of Agreement to Sale, by the informant, this Petitioner found out that jamabandi was notin the name of the informant and flashed the matter to other vendees of Agreement to Sale. As such the informant is of firm belief that this deal has been spoiled by the petitioner in flashing the said lacunae. It is next submitted that the petitioner has clean antecedent as stated in para 4 of the bail application. The petitioner is in custody since 08-07-2023. > The learmed PP. ably assisted by learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the petitioner. Learned coun! | for the informant has submitted that the petitioner earlier has also been asking for ransom from the informant. The leamed Public Prosecutor Pointed towards para 18 of the case diary which is contrary to the submission | of learned counsel for the petitioner, as two criminal antecedents of similar nature has been recorded therein against the petitioner, being Jagdishpur | (Bypass) PS. Case No, 422/2019 and Jagdishpur (Bypass) PS. Case No. 611/202. That investigation is going on and charge-sheet is yet to be submitted. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. 6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case: nature ol offence i.e. severity of punishment in the event of conviction: nature of | accusation against the petitioner; material collected in course of investigation thereof; two criminal antecedent of the petitioner for offences of similar nature and; that investigation is going on & charge-sheet is yet to be submitted, this court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the bail application of the petitioner Anand Kumar Sah is rejected. Repexh Qto Sessions Judge. 4 cays | 7 (2f/>.>, Mprcharge ,