Shyam Sher Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.21780 of 2020 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1186 Year-2018 Thana- SASARAM NAGAR District- Rohtas ====================================================== 1.
SHYAM SHER SINGH Son of Late Awadhesh Singh Resident of Village - Sakhuan, P.S. - P.O. Panjar, P.S.- Karahagar, Dist.- Rohtas. 2.
Amit Kumar Singh Son of Shyam Sher Singh Resident of Village - Sakhuan, P.S. - P.O. Panjar, P.S.- Karahagar, Dist.- Rohtas. 3.
Bipin Bihari Singh Son of Late Awadhesh Singh Resident of Village - Sakhuan, P.S. - P.O. Panjar, P.S.- Karahagar, Dist.- Rohtas. 4.
Rajiv Ranjan Singh Son of Late Awadhesh Singh Resident of Village - Sakhuan, P.S. - P.O. Panjar, P.S.- Karahagar, Dist.- Rohtas. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
THE STATE OF BIHAR ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Dineshwar Mishra For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.Gauri Shankar Gupta Mr.Yogendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 18-07-2022 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 420, 406, 380, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution case, co-accused Chandan Kumar Singh had taken Rs. 35,68,000/- from the informant to invest the money towards capital contribution for purpose of business. It is further alleged that co-accused Chandan Kumar has also taken Rs. 35,000/- from the wife of informant. It is alleged that when co-accused did not return money, the informant sent legal notice, whereupon, all the accused persons
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.21780 of 2020(5) dt.18-07-2022 2/2 including petitioners came and threatened the informant with dire consequences and took out Rs. 10,000/- from the counter and also obtained signature of informant 4-5 blank papers. It is submitted on behalf of petitioners that specific accusation is against co-accused Chandan Kumar, who has already been granted anticipatory bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 24.09.2019 passed in Cr.Misc. No. 43479 of 2019. So far as petitioners are concerned, they are relative of co-accused Chandan Kumar, and have falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioners have got clean antecedent. Learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
Considering the fact that co-accused Chandan Kumar, against whom there is specific accusation, has already been granted anticipatory bail and petitioners have got clean antecedent, the provisional bail granted to the petitioners, vide order dated 21.10.2020, is hereby confirmed and petitioners are directed to remain on same bail-bonds.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay/- U T