Pritesh Chaudhary @ Pritesh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.29055 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1324 Year-2023 Thana- BEGUSARAI COMPLAINT CASE District- Begusarai ====================================================== Pritesh Chaudhary @ Pritesh Kumar Son of Shyam Chaudhary Resident of village- Ajhour P.S -Neema Chand pura, District -Begusarai ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Rohit Kumar son of Late Sipahi village- Beerpur, Ps- Beerpur, DistBegusarai ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR VERMA ORAL ORDER 02-05-2025 Heard Mr. Sarvottam Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Aditya Narayan Singh.1, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

2. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Begusarai Complain Case No. 1324 C of 2023, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 506, 406 of Indian Penal Code.

3. As per the complaint petition, the petitioner along with other co-accused persons tricked the complainant and took money under the pretext of giving employment in their office and when the complainant asked for his money back, all the accused persons including the petitioner assaulted him.

2/4

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has clean antecedent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. From bare perusal of the complaint petition, it transpires that only allegation against this petitioner is that he has received Rs. 25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) from the complainant. He further submits that the complainant has given Rs. 3,00,000/-(Rupees Three Lakhs) to co-accused Arjun Kumar Chaudhary and pursuant to the direction of this Court in Cr.Misc No. 3319 of 2024, the said Arjun Kumar Chaudhary has returned the money to the complainant. He further submits that similarly situated coaccused persons, namely, Sagar Kumar vide order dated 12.07.2024 in Cr.Misc No. 28061 of 2024 and Arjun Kumar Chaudhary vide order dated 07.02.2024 in Cr.Misc. No. 3319 of 2024 have been granted the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the petitioner has clean antecedent and co-accused person, namely, Arjun Kumar Chaudhary has returned Rs. 3,00,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs) to the complainant, let the petitioner,

3/4 above named, in the event of arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M, Begusarai in connection with Begusarai Complain Case No. 1324 C of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure / Section 482(2) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and with other following conditions:- i. Petitioner shall co-operate in the trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the court and shall remain physically present as directed by the court and on his absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, his bail bond shall be cancelled by the Court below. ii. If the petitioner tampers with the evidence or the witnesses, in that case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

iii. And further condition that the court below shall verify the criminal antecedent of the petitioner and in case at any stage it is found that the petitioner has concealed his criminal antecedent, the court below shall take step for cancellation of bail bond of the petitioner. However, the

4/4 acceptance of bail bond in terms of the above-mentioned order shall not be delayed for purpose of or in the name of verification.

(Rajesh Kumar Verma, J) Suruchi/- U T