IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.45904 of 2008 SAURAV KUMAR @ SAURAV SINGH @ CHIKU, son of Sri Aditya Singh, resident of village-Narhat, P.S.Narhat, District-Nawada. Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3. 16.2.2009 Heard Sri Rana Pratap Singh, Senir Advocate for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The case has been registered under Section 364A/34 of the IPC for the kidnapping of two persons, namely, Sanjay Kumar and Bhawesh Jha who had picked up allegedly by a Sumo vehicle. The two returned on the very next day of the incident which occurred on 29.1.2006 and they appear making statements, of course, Sanjay Kumar very belatedly but not named any one as their captures or kidnappers. The police had put a collar identifier set on the telephone line of the informant so as to picking up any call which could be made for payment of ransom for release of the victims but no call was ever received. In some of others, one Kailu Singh was suspected to have his hand in the offence and he was picked up by the police and a cellular phone was also found lying at that place which was also seized and from the print out of the same, it was - 2 - revealed that calls were repeatedly made or received by the seized cellular phone from another number which was registered in the name of one, Rama Nand Deo. The said Rama Nand Deo was also called to the police station and he reported that his Ration Card had been taken by the petitioner and his father, namely, Aditya Singh and it appears that they utilized the same for obtaining a SIM card. Rama Nand Deo was let off without being formally arrested. Kailu Singh’s confession was recorded by the police and he named many persons as may appear from paragraph 130 of the case diary. Subsequently, Bhushan Singh, another accused also confessed to naming the petitioner and his father Aditya Singh. A person named Akhilesh Singh appeared before the police on 12.2.2006, i.e., after about 14 or 15 days of the incident to narrate that he found two victims confined in a field and the petitioner and his father present there. By drawing the attention of the court to one of the Annexures to the supplementary affidavit (Annexure-4 series), it has been pointed out that on account of being arrested in a case, the petitioner’s father, namely, Aditya Singh was in - 3 - jail custody since 23.3.2006 and he was directed to be released on bail by an order passed on 28th May, 2006, i.e., about four months after the incident and as such, his presence as indicated by the statement of witness, Akhilesh Singh appears improbable. Not only in case of Aditya Singh but also in case of present petitioner, it is contended that the best course of action was to put the petitioner on test identification parade by calling the two victims so as to identifying but that was not done and the worst was that one of the victims, namely, Sanjay Kumar filed a petition holding none responsible to the petitioner. Let the above named petitioner be released from custody on furnishing bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand)with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.No.II, Nalanda at Bihar Sharif in S.T.No.255 of 2008(Silao P.S.case No.43 of 2006, Tr.No.255 of 2008). B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha, J. )