Dhananjay Kumar And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.12172 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1867 Year- 2013 Thana -GOPALGANJ COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGOPALGANJ ======================================================
1. Dhananjay Kumar, son of Shri Raghunath Chaudhary, Resident of Village- Kumbhiya Bishunpurwa, P.S.- Bagaha, District- West Champaran, S.D.O. Electric Supply Division, Gopalganj.
2. Prashant Kumar Manju, son of Om Chandra Prasad, Resident of Village/Mohalla- Panchwati Nagar, P.O.+P.S.- Rajgir, District- Nalanda, S.D.O., Electric Supply Division, Gopalganj.
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar.
2. Dr. Baidyanath Prasad Singh, son of Late Bake Bahadur Singh, Resident of Village- Gopalganj, Siwan Marg (Thawe) Ward No.22, P.S. and P.S.- Gopalganj, District- Gopalganj.
.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anand Kishore Choudhary For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Vinod Shankar Modi ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 22-03-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in Complaint Case No.1867 of 2013 instituted for the offence under section 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It has been submitted that when the team of electricity department raided on the premises of the complainant for checking the electric meter and theft of electric energy, then this false case has been filed.
The other two accused of this case have already been
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.12172 of 2017 (2) dt.22-03-2017 2/2 granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this court vide order dt. 17.9.2016 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 39651 of 2016. From the complaint petition itself, it appears that accused persons came in the premises of the complainant to check electricity load and found that theft has been committed by the complainant.
It is alleged that they demanded Rs. 20,000/- which was paid by him but there is no supporting document which show that such amount has been given by the complainant to the accused persons.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners is allowed. In the event of surrender/arrest of the petitioners named above, within six weeks from today, in connection with Complaint Case No.1867 of 2013, Tr. No. 2436 of 2016, they shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Dev Priya Kumar, Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Gopalganj, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(Sanjay Priya, J) Ravi/- U T