IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20303 of 2009 ROBIN KUMAR @ ROBIN SINGH, son of Sri Birendra Kumar Singh @ Birendra Singh, resident of village- Wajitpur, P.s. Triveniganj, District- Supaul, at present residing in the house of Manoj Singh, Khatri Lane, Gurhatta, P.S.- Khajekala, Patna …… Petitioner Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR …… Opp.Party ----------- 4. 27/10/2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant. Case was initially instituted under section 365 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and subsequently converted into section 364 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Case diary was called for in the case and from materials available on record it appears that son of the informant had love affair with the sister of the petitioner which was not being approved by the petitioner and son of the informant was being threatened. From the case diary it appears that on the fateful day petitioner along with one Sheru Singh, Arun Kumar and Manish Kumar assembled at a place and made some planning and thereafter son of the informant was taken away on motorcycle by Arun Kumar and Sheru Singh. Since then, son of the - 2 - informant is traceless till now. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that said Arun Kumar and Sheru Singh have been allowed bail by this Court. On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant submits that it was this petitioner on whose instigation son of the informant was kidnapped by Arun Kumar and Sheru Singh and therefore, this petitioner was master mind behind all the planning. This is an admitted fact that son of the informant was in love with the sister of the petitioner which was not approved by the petitioner. Petitioner and other three accused were last seen assembled at a place hatching conspiracy and thereafter the boy was seen being taken away by Arun Kumar and Sheru Singh. This petitioner admittedly had a grievance against the said boy and it cannot be ruled out that the boy was not kidnapped as a result of conspiracy hatched by the petitioner. The said boy has not been recovered as yet. In the circumstances, this Court is not inclined to allow the petitioner on bail. This application is accordingly dismissed. The trial - 3 - court is directed to expedite the trial of the case. It is informed that the case has been committed. Hence, if the trial does not conclude within one year, petitioner will be at liberty to renew his prayer for bail. Pradeep/ (J. N. Singh, J.)