Satyam Sandil v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13549 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-501 Year-2020 Thana- BIHAR District- Nalanda ====================================================== Satyam Sandil Son of Bhola Singh R/o Village- Rajwara, P.S.- Barauni, District- Begusarai.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Raj Kumar Sinha For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Rajeev Nayan, App, 231 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 05-09-2022 Heard Mr. Krishna Prasad Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Raj Kumar Sinha for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Bihar P.S. Case No.501 of 2020, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has got one criminal antecedent as stated in paragraph-3 of the bail applications. It is submitted that petitioner himself runs a company namely Urvashi Consultancy Service, Begusarai so the allegation levelled against the petitioner is due to business

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.13549 of 2022(3) dt.05-09-2022 2/2 rivalry. It is submitted that the petitioner has neither appointed nor prepared any letter in the name of T.C.S. Company and the name of the petitioner has been taken by co-accused, Kanhaiya Kumar. It is also submitted that the petitioner is neither a beneficiary nor committed any fraud with the said company. Learned APP for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that name of the petitioner was disclosed in the confessional statement of coaccused, Kanhaiya Kumar who was apprehended by the police. Taking into consideration the facts aforesaid, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, if petitioner surrenders before the learned court below within a period of six weeks from today and prays for regular bail, the learned court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner preferably on the same day without being prejudiced by this order.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Sanjay/- U T