Ripti Sharma @ Ripti Kumar Sharma @ Ripti Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.1299 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -34 Year- 2016 Thana -SACHIWALAYA District- PATNA ====================================================== Ripti Sharma @ Ripti Kumar Sharma @ Ripti Kumar, Son of Anjani Kumar Sharma, r/o village - Kalgiganj, P.S. Kahalgaon, Distt. Bhagalpur .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vivekanand Vivek, Advoate. For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Panchanand Pandit, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 20-02-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner seeks bail in a case instituted for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged in the written report that the informant had received a call that he got a lottery and he will get prize of four wheelers worth Rs.23,00,000/-. The informant deposited half of the price of the vehicle in different account number given by the caller. The informant deposited Rs.10,96,800/- in the account Nos. 462510110007613, 581210110010027, 581210110009945 and 3043000100077502 in the name of Sanjay Chaurasia, Rajiv Ranjan Singh, Ripti Sharma and Rajiv Singh respectively and, thereafter, the caller stopped calling the informant and then he got suspicion and filed this case. The I.O. in course of

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.1299 of 2017 (4) dt.20-02-2017 2/2 investigation got the details of unknown callers and one of the accounts was found belonging to the petitioner. The learned Sessions Judge has mentioned in the impugned order that in paragraph-39 of the case diary it has come during investigation that the petitioner opened forged account in the bank and received Rs.1,35,000/- in that account on different dates.

The counsel for the informant has stated that he has deposited Rs.1,43,000/- in the name of Ripti Sharma in Account No. 581210110009945. In support of it, he has enclosed the paying slip and bank statement which is annexed as Annexure1/1 and 1/2 of the counter affidavit. In such circumstances, keeping in view the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of committing fraud, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The prayer for bail of the petitioner stands rejected. However, the petitioner may renew his prayer for bail after six months if no substantive progress is made in the trial. (Sanjay Priya, J) S.Ali/- U T