Patna High CourtCR. MISC./28876/2024bail rejected

Anmol Yadav v. The State Of Bihar

2025-01-17Mr. Justice Rajiv Roy2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28876 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-786 Year-2023 Thana- FORBESGANJ District- Araria ====================================================== Anmol Yadav Son of Late Sadanand Yadav Resident of Village- Panjarkatta, Ward No. 02, P.S.- Narpatganj, Dist.- Araria ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the State :

Mr. Anant Kumar 1, APP For the Informant :

Mr. Viveka Nand Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY ORAL ORDER 17-01-2025 No one appears on behalf of the petitioner though Mr. Viveka Nand Singh, representing the informant and learned APP for the State is present.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Forbesganj P.S. Case No. 786 of 2023 for the offence under Sections 406, 420, 506 and 384 of the Indian Penal Code, lodged on 22.08.2023 by the informant, Dhirendra Kumar Yadav.

3. As per prosecution story, the complainant alleged that this petitioner alongwith his father came to his house and requested to sell a piece of land for a consideration amount of Rs. 8,75,000/-. Out of which, Rs. 4,00,000/- was paid in the Account of his wife and another Rs. 1,00,000/- was transferred

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28876 of 2024(4) dt.17-01-2025 2/2 on the same day. Further, Rs. 1,75,000/- was transferred again in the Account which followed Rs. 2,00,000/- in cash on 7.6.2022, totalling Rs. 8,75,000/-.

4. It is the submission of learned counsel for the informant that a perusal of the complaint would show that the intent of cheating was there since the beginning with the petitioner which reflects from the fact that despite the undertaking given before the Court on 15.05.2024, he again chose to look the other way.

5. Considering the submissions put forward by the learned counsel for the informant as also the State who echo the same view, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

7. Petitioner to surrender within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the Police shall take appropriate steps.

(Rajiv Roy, J) vinayak/- U T