Shailendra Yadav @ Shailendra Kumar Yadav @ Shailendra Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16894 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-415 Year-2018 Thana- SUPAUL District- Supaul ====================================================== SHAILENDRA YADAV @ SHAILENDRA KUMAR YADAV @ SHAILENDRA KUMAR Son of Late Sitaram Prasad Yadav Resident of Village-Ghogharariya (Ward no.7) Manoharpatti, P.S. and District-Supaul at present Resident of Muhalla-Nagar Parisad Supaul (Ward no.1), P.S and District-Supaul.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Arun Kumar Jha, Advocate.

For the State :

Mr. Satyendra Prasad, APP For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Pranav Kumar, Advocate. Mr. Vijay Bardhan, Advocate.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 01-03-2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Section 420 & 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that informant is the owner of the truck and proprietor of P.S. Enterprises. The petitioner is the supplier of the stone chips. The petitioner is said to have used the truck of the informant for carrying stone chips on credit. When the rent of the truck became due for about Rs.2

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16894 of 2020(8) dt.01-03-2021 2/3 lakh and after repeated requests the petitioner issued a cheque but it was dishonored due to insufficient amount. When the informant approached the petitioner for payment of due amount, he is said to have abused by the petitioner.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that no such occurrence as alleged ever took place. He has been falsely implicated in this case. As a matter of fact, when the petitioner issued the cheque at that time there was sufficinet money in his account but, after sometime, for business work the money was withdrawn by him and without informing him the informant deposited the said cheque in the bank and it became dishonored. He has no criminal antecedent. Petitioner is ready to deposit Rs.40,000.00 (Rupees Forty Thousand) in the Nazarat of the Civil Court subject to the final outcome of the case.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, after depositing Rs.40,000.00 (Rupees Forty Thousand) in the Nazarat of the Civil Court, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16894 of 2020(8) dt.01-03-2021 3/3 each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Supaul in connection with Supaul P.S. Case No. 415 of 2018, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

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