Subhash Chandra Paswan v. The State Of Bihar And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12179 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1191 Year-2017 Thana- MUZFFARPUR COMPLAINT CASE District- Muzaffarpur ====================================================== SUBHASH CHANDRA PASWAN, Son of Sukul Paswan, resident of VillageSaraiya Kothi, P.S.-Saraiya, District-Muzaffarpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Jang Bahadur Paswan, Son of Late Uchit Paswan, resident of VillageSaraiya Kothi, P.S.-Saraiya, District-Muzaffarpur. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shashank Shekhar For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Murli Dhar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL ORDER 27-02-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioner and the same is kept on record. Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make necessary correction in paragraph 3 of the application in the light of statement made in the supplementary affidavit in course of the day.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, in short, is that the accused

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12179 of 2019(2) dt.27-02-2019 2/3 persons committed forgery with the complainant by inducing him to deposit certain amount on the pretext of doubling the amount after completion of three years.

It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that there is no allegation of tampering of witnesses alleged against the petitioner. The petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case. A series of litigation is pending between the parties. What amount has been paid by the complainant on inducement made by the petitioner in the company in question has not been indicated by the complainant. A deposit receipt of Rs. 3,000/- with the company in question is enclosed which does not bear signature of the petitioner. There is no other documentary evidence to show that the petitioner was involved in the alleged occurrence. From perusal of the money receipt, it appears that the company in question is not a non-banking organization rather it is a infrastructure company in which the complainant has deposited Rs. 3,000/-.

On behalf of the State, it is submitted that the petitioner is named in the complaint case.

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of arrest/surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12179 of 2019(2) dt.27-02-2019 3/3 from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M. -1st Class, Muzaffarpur in connection with Complaint Case No. 1191 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Sudhir Singh, J) Pankaj/- U T