Amresh Kumar @ Chand Kumar @ Amresh Kumar Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11620 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-579 Year-2019 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE District- Begusarai ====================================================== Amresh Kumar @ Chand Kumar @ Amresh Kumar Singh Son Of Late Umesh Prasad Singh @ Late Umesh Singh Resident Of Village - Koriya, P.S.- Muffasil, District - Begusarai ... ... Petitioner
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Usha Devi Wife of Sri Ram Mahto Resident of Village - Killi, P.S.- Muffasil, District - Begusarai ... ... Opposite Party ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Randhir Kumar No.1, Advocate For the Opposite Parties :
Mr. Shyam Kumar Singh, A.P.P.
Mr. JP Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 03-09-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the State and opposite party no.2.
2. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 341, 323, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. As per the prosecution case, on the persuasion of the petitioner, complainant opened account in the Grahak Seva Kendra in 2016 and kept on depositing money. After sometime, when she tried to withdraw Rs.15,000/- from the said account, it was told that she has already withdrawn the said amount. Thus, the petitioner, with the aid of other accused persons, fraudulently digested the deposit of the complainant.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, referring to the bank statement (annexure 2) submits that the complainant opened account in S.B.I Grahak seva Kendra on 01/01/16 and she regularly made deposit and withdrawal of the amount till 19/7/17 but thereafter no deposit was made by her. Besides this, from perusal of the complaint, it appears that the date of occurrence is 2/4/2019 and complaint was filed on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11620 of 2023(3) dt.03-09-2024 2/2 12/4/19 with false and concocted story. Allegation of marpit and abuse is exaggeration. Petitioner claims clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the State as well as the opposite party no.2 oppose the prayer for bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts of the case, prayer for bail of the petitioner is allowed. In the event of arrest/surrender within eight weeks from today, let the petitioner, mentioned above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Begusarai in Complaint Case No. 579C/2019, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Shashi U T