Most. Pushpa Singh @ Pushpa Kumari v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.29313 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -56 Year- 2015 Thana -SC/ST PS DistrictEASTCHAMPARAN(MOTIHARI) ====================================================== MOST. PUSHPA SINGH @ PUSHPA KUMARI Wife of Krishna Kumar Singh Resident of village- Ahrauliya, P.S.- Chakiya, District- East Champaran .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Jiyalal Mathur, son of Late Yodha Baitha of village Propparoor Colony Bara Chakia, P.S. Chakia, East Champaran .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rajive Ranjan Singh For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Ram Shankar Das ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ORAL ORDER 21-11-2016 Heard the counsel for the petitioner and the informant as well as the State.
The petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail in S.C/S.T. (MAT) P.S. Case No. 56 of 2015 registered under sections 341, 323, 379, 504/34 IPC including diverse penal provisions of the SC/SC (POA) Act, 1989.
In short, the allegation is that on the assurance that the land belonging to the petitioner would be sold, two other accused persons persuaded the informant to pay Rs. 2,50,000/- out of which Rs. 2,00,000/- was deposited in the account of the petitioner whereas Rs. 50,000/- was paid in cash. In spite of persuasion by
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29313 of 2016 (3) dt.21-11-2016 2/3 the informant, the land was not sold. Subsequently, a chaque of Rs. 50,000/- was given to the petitioner, but the rest amount remained with the petitioner and other co-accuseds. Subsequently, when the informant demanded the money, it is alleged that he was mishandled/assaulted taking the name of his caste. The contention of the petitioner is that the amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- was deposited in the account of the petitioner on 19.11.2010. After much delay, the case has been lodged by the informant. In the case of the petitioner, no case under SC/ST (POA) Act would be made out. Actually the amount was not received by the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the State as well as the informant, on the other hand, submit that there is an allegation of demand and payment of a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- out of which rest Rs. 2,00,000/- was deposited in the account of the petitioner which is reflected from the bank records. It is a case of misappropriation of huge money by inducing the informant.
On a consideration of the submissions of the parties and on going through the materials on record, in my view, it is not a fit case for grant of pre-arrest bail. The prayer is accordingly rejected If the petitioner surrenders and prays for bail, the same
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.29313 of 2016 (3) dt.21-11-2016 3/3 shall be considered and disposed of on its own merit in accordance with law without being prejudiced by the present order. (Kishore Kumar Mandal, J) HR/- U T