Sanoj Kumar Ray @ Sanoj Kumar Rai @ Sanoj Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.12854 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-679 Year-2021 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria ====================================================== Sanoj Kumar Ray @ Sanoj Kumar Rai @ Sanoj Rai Son Of Nageshwar Ray Resident Of Village - Ararbari, P.S.- Tarabari, Distt.- Araria. ... ... Petitioner/S

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Raghwendra Pratap Singh, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Binod Kumar, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Anil Prasad Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL KUMAR PANWAR ORAL ORDER 07-12-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the Informant and learned APP for the State and perused the case diary.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

Allegedly, it is a case of cheating by the petitioner who, in the pretext of purchasing the land, dishonestly received cash amount in question amounting to a sum of Rs.26,80,000/- with false assurance to return the money but committed criminal breach of trust by not returning the money. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. He

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.12854 of 2022(4) dt.07-12-2022 2/2 further submits that there is no documentary proof about receiving money by the petitioner.

Learned APP appearing for the State as well as the Informant have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is the habitual cheater and in this respect, he has criminal antecedent of more than eight criminal cases. He further submits that out of total amount of 26,80,000/- about 1,60,000/- has been returned and during investigation witnesses have supported the case of the prosecution and the allegation is established prima-facie against the petitioner for committing fraud, forgery and criminal breach of trust by extorting huge amount of cash.

After considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below and pray for regular bail.

(Sunil Kumar Panwar, J) Brajesh Kumar/- U T