Ramakant Singh v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.31674 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -494 Year- 2014 Thana -SHEKHPURA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictSEKHPURA ====================================================== Ramakant Singh, son of Ram Badan Singh, R/o Village Khojagachhi, P.S. Barbigha, District Sheikhpura, presently Proprietor, Mahaveer Agency, Mahaveer Chquk, P.S. Barbigha, District Sheikhpura .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar &

2. Surya Narayan Singh, son of Sri Ram Ratan Singh, resident of Village - Khojagachhi, P.S. Barbigha, District Sheikhpura. .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance:

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar, Advocate.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Amit Kumar Rakesh, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 13-07-2017 Heard Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Amit Kumar Rakesh, learned A.P.P. for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 494C/2014 registered under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prior to filing of the present Complaint Case No. 494C/2014 in which the petitioner has been named as an accused, this petitioner had lodged a First Information Report, being Barbigha P.S. Case No. 86/2013 dated 26.04.2013, against the complainant whose cheque issued against the purchase of tractor had stood dishonoured on

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.31674 of 2017 (2) dt.13-07-2017 2/2 presentation. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is running his agency business and is dealing in Holland Tractor. The complainant was the purchaser of one of the tractors and a dispute arose over the outstanding payment in which these cases have cropped up. Learned counsel further submits that although there are two other cases against the petitioner, however, all those cases have arisen out of business transactions in similar nature as the purchasers after taking away tractors are sometime involved in creating disputes.

Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer for bail.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, let the petitioner, named above, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt / production of a copy of this order, be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sheikhpura in connection with Complaint Case No. 494C/2014, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Dilip, AR U T