Sukdev Hazra And ORS v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13974 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2015 Thana- ARARIA District- Araria ====================================================== 1.

SUKDEV HAZRA Son of Sri Jai Kishan Hazra Resident of MOhallaSipahi Tola, Baxaghat Road, P.s.- K. Hat, District - Purnea 2.

Ashutosh Kumar @ Sushil Kumar @ Ashutosh Kumar Sushil Son of Shri Brahamdev Sah Resident of Village - Kukaran, P.S.- Dhamdaha, District - Purnea 3.

Prabhat Kumar Prabhakar @ Sintu Son of Sri Kriti Das Resident of Village - Dibra Bazar, P.S.- Barhara, District - Purnea 4.

Pankaj Kumar Choudhary Son of Sri Aano Choudhary Resident of Village - Pipra, P.S.- Choutham, District - Khagaria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amit Kumar Anand For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Abhay Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 30-04-2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Araria (Bairgachhi) P.S.Case no.187 of 2015 registered for offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 379, 384, 420, 406 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioners is that they were running non-banking in the name and stile of Angel Rural Development Ltd. and they appointed persons as the commission agent and got Rs.18,94,621/- deposited in the bank and on maturity when the money was demanded, they were

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13974 of 2019(3) dt.30-04-2019 2/2 assaulted and the pass books were snatched.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that no specific allegation has been attributed as who has deposited the amount and with whom and the petitioners are not employees of the bank and they have falsely been implicated int his cae.

Heard learned A.P.P. and the learned counsel for the complainant. They have opposed the prayer for bail.. Having heard both sides and in view of the facts and circumstances, as stated above, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, however, the petitioners are directed to surrender before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the order and make prayer for regular bail, which will be considered by the learned court on the basis of allegation of the individual petitioners and considering the same appropriate order may be passed.

With the aforesaid direction, this application is dismissed.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) chn/- U T