Manoj Kumar @ Mantu Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.14980 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1646 Year-2023 Thana- NAWADA District- Nawada ====================================================== Manoj Kumar @ Mantu Yadav Son of late Arvind Yadav Resident of vill.- Jorbadih, P.S.-Kawakole, Distt.-Nawada ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Birendra Kumar, Advocate For the Informant : Ms. Muskan Singh, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 12-03-2024 Heard Mr. Birendra Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Muskan Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Informant and Mr. Sanjay Kumar Tiwary, learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest connection with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 1646 of 2023, F.I.R. dated 22.10.2023 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he has committed fraud by taking money of Rs. 6,00,000/- to supply bricks to the informant but he did not supply the same nor return the money to the informant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14980 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 2/3 the petitioner has clean antecedent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the allegation as alleged in the F.I.R. is false and fabricated and the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. He further submits that as per F.I.R. the petitioner has received Rs. 6,00,000/- from the informant for supply of bricks but the petitioner has never supplied the bricks nor return the amount to the informant. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has supplied the bricks to the informant to the tune of Rs. 5,64,000/- and he is ready to return the rest amount i.e. 36,000/-.
5. Learned counsel for the Informant as well as learned APP for the State, on the other hand, vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that from perusal of the impugned order it appears that the case of the petitioner before the learned Court below was that he has returned the amount by cash to the informant and in the High Court petitioner has taken a stand that he has supplied the bricks to the informant.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with Nawada Town P.S. Case No. 1646 of 2023
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.14980 of 2024(2) dt.12-03-2024 3/3 pending in the Court of learned C.J.M., Nawada.
7. Prayer is refused.
(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Ibrar//- U T