Nehal Sinha v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.22793 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-210 Year-2021 Thana- SHASTRINAGAR District- Patna ====================================================== NEHAL SINHA SON OF NAVIN KUMAR SINHA R/O- HOUSE NO.-34 UPADHAYAY LANE, NEAR UPADHAYAY BHAWAN, WEST LOHANIPUR KADAMKUAN, P.S.- KADAMKUAN, DISTRICT- PATNA, BIHAR- 800003 ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Neerad Parashar For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Nand Kishore Prasad Mr. Bajrangi Lal ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 06-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Section 420 and some other ancillary Sections of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, the informant paid Rs. 32 lacs in the account of Bhusamridh Infra Company for getting 2400 sq feet of land but despite taking consideration amount the Company has not executed any sale deed and in this way all the accused persons, including this petitioner, defalcated the amount and cheated the informant.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that petitioner is not named in the FIR and his name transpired
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.22793 of 2022(2) dt.06-09-2022 2/2 in this case during the course of investigation. It is further submitted that money was transferred in the account of company and not a single penny has been deposited in the account of the petitioner. Petitioner has got clean antecedent. Learned counsel appearing for the State and the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail and submits that petitioner was Project Officer in the company and he cannot escape the liability. The petitioner and other accused persons are land Mafia and running a racket and committing cheating and forgery with the innocent persons.
Considering the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the same is rejected. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) BKS/- U T