Sudhanshu Saurabh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.16174 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-114 Year-2017 Thana- AANDAR District- Siwan ====================================================== Sudhanshu Saurabh Son of Harendra Singh @ Harendra Kumar Singh Resident of Village - Sadikpur, P.S.- Goreakothi, Distt.- Siwan. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ashok Kumar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mrs.Rina Sinha ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 01-12-2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.
Petitioner apprehends his arrest in Ander P.S. Case No. 114 of 2017 registered for the offence under Sections 419, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, this petitioner, who is an agent, sent the informant abroad after taking huge amount, but it is alleged that the informant was not even paid wages there. It is submitted on behalf of petitioner that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. It is further submitted that co-accused Gautam Sah already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court, vide order dated 11-12-2018 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 62991 of 2018 (Annexure 2 to the petition). However, the case of the petitioner is distinguishable
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.16174 of 2020(3) dt.01-12-2020 2/2 from the case of Gautam Sah (petitioner of Cr.Misc. No. 62991 of 2018), who has been released on bail, since petitioner of the present case is alleged to be agent, who took money from the informant for sending him abroad, whereas, petitioner of Cr.Misc. No. 62991 of 2018 (Gautam Sah) had simply introduced the informant with the petitioner of the present case. Considering the nature of allegation and the fact that petitioner has received huge money from the informant for sending him abroad and the fact that he (informant) was not even paid his salary for the work done by him, I am not inclined to grant him anticipatory bail and accordingly, the bail application of petitioner is rejected.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J.) anay/- U T