P. Surya Narayan Raju v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29826 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1430 Year-2012 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== 1.
P. SURYA NARAYAN RAJU S/o P. Rama Raju Resident of 9-76, VillageAlkapuram, Pittlavanipalem, P.S.-Chanduvalu, Dist.-Guntur, Andhra Pradesh-522314 2.
P.V.N. RAJU S/o Venkat Raju Resident of Plot No.-188C, Western Hills, Kukatpally, P.S.-Kukatpally, Hyderabad (Telangana) ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Vikas Kumar Mandilwar, M/s V.C. Enterprises, Postal Park, Road, No.-3, P.S.-Kankarbagh, Patna Patna ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioners :
Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Mr. Nand Kishore Prasad, APP For Opposite Party No.2 :
Mr. Saroj Kumar Choudhary, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 02-09-2024 Heard learned counsels for the parties.
2. The petitioners apprehend their arrest in a complaint case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 406, 420, 384, 379, 504 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
3. At the outset, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that due to intervention of common friends and well-wishers, the dispute between the parties has already amicably been settled. It is further submitted that pursuant to the compromise, petitioners have already handed
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.29826 of 2023(21) dt.02-09-2024 2/2 over a demand draft of Rs. 3,00,000/- (Three lakh rupees) dated 29.04.2024 bearing No. 823093 (Annexure-9 to supplementary affidavit) to the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 and as per settlement, all the amounts of Rs. 14,00,000/- (Fourteen lakh rupees), along with agreed interest, have been paid to the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2.
4. Learned counsel for the complainant/Opposite Party No. 2 does not dispute the aforesaid contentions.
5. Considering the fact that dispute between the parties has already been resolved, the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners is allowed.
6. Accordingly, in the event of arrest/surrender within a period of twelve weeks from today, let the above named petitioners be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna, in connection with Complaint Case No. 1430(C) of 2012, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashank/- U T