Sanni Kumar Saurabh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8159 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-280 Year-2021 Thana- KUDRA District- Kaimur (Bhabua) ====================================================== Sanni Kumar Saurabh, Son of Shambhu singh Kushwaha Resident of Village - belaon, P.S. - Belaon, District - Kaimur at Bhabua. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajani Kant Pandey, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Arun Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 14-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
Let the defect (s), as pointed out by the office, be removed within a period of four weeks.
In the present case, the petitioner seeks bail in connection with Kudra P.S. Case No. 280 of 2021 registered for the alleged offences under Sections 419/420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66(D) of the I.T. Act.
As per prosecution case, the petitioner duped the informant Rs. 6,30,000/- for getting job for the elder brother of the informant. It is further alleged that the petitioner has cheated a large number of persons by putting a photo of senior police officer in his place on his number.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.8159 of 2022(3) dt.14-12-2022 2/2 case. No recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner. The informant has given money for business transaction to the petitioner who supplied cloths to the informant. But in order to grab the money, the informant has lodged this false case. It is evident from the FIR that for an illegal purpose, money has been given but the informant was not prosecuted by the police. The petitioner is in custody since 05.10.2021 and charge-sheet has been submitted. Learned APP opposes the prayer for bail.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances and submissions made on behalf of the parties and considering the serious nature of allegation that the petitioner has taken money in the name of getting the job for the elder brother of the informant, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Hence, the prayer for bail is rejected.
However, the learned trial court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same preferably within a period of six months. If the trial is not concluded within a period of six months, then the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail. (Arun Kumar Jha, J) Rajnish/- U T