Pintu Kumar Verma @ Pintu Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.18943 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-464 Year-2021 Thana- GAYA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGaya ====================================================== 1.

Pintu Kumar Verma @ Pintu Kumar S/o Late Awadh Kishore Verma R/o Vill - Guraru Bazar, Jagir, P.S. - Guraru, Dist. - Gaya 2.

Rakesh Kumar Verma @ Rakesh Kumar S/o Late Awadh Kishore Verma R/o Vill - Guraru Bazar, Jagir, P.S. - Guraru, Dist. - Gaya ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Binod Lal Srivastva Son of Motilal Srivastava R/o Vill - Bara Guraru, P.S. - Guraru, Dist. - Gaya ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Ravindra Kumar,Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Uma Shankar Prasad Singh,APP Mr.Praveen Kumar,Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 4.

20-06-2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant / opposite party no. 2.

2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 504, 406, 420, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. It is alleged that despite taking consideration money, petitioners refused to execute the sale-deed in favour of the complainant/opposite party no. 2, nor returned the alleged amount.

4. It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that from bare perusal of the complaint petition, it is apparent that entire

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.18943 of 2024(4) dt.20-06-2024 2/2 transaction of money took place between the complainant and co-accused Mukesh Kumar. Petitioners have not received a single penny from the complainant. The cheques in question have been issued by the co-accused Mukesh Kumar, which got bounced due to insufficiency of fund. Petitioners have been made accused in this case merely because they happen to be full brothers of co-accused Mukesh Kumar. Petitioners claim clean antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 vehemently opposed the bail petition.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest/surrender within a period of six weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Gaya in connection with Complaint Case No. 464 of 2021, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T