Patna High CourtCR. MISC./37046/2017rejected

Arun Kumar Dixit v. State Of Bihar And ANR

2017-11-21Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37046 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-136 Year-2016 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== Arun Kumar Dixit son of Audh Narain Dixit, resident of Quarter No. O.C.B. near General Office, Dalmianagar, P.O. and P.S.- Dalmianagar, DistrictRohtas (Bihar) ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

State Of Bihar & Anr ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Dharmendra Kumar Singh For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. SRI AJAY KUMAR-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 21-11-2017 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, complainant and the State.

Petitioner apprehends arrest in connection with Complaint Case No. 136 C of 2016 registered for the offence punishable under sections 406 of the Indian Penal Code and section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that present case has been lodged with mala fide intention. Petitoner has no heart disease and his heart was never operated, and as such, the demand of money on that pretext is completely false. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned counsels appearing for the State and the complainant opposes the prayer for bail and submits that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37046 of 2017(5) dt.21-11-2017 2/2 materials are there to suggest that this petitioner had taken money from the complainant and in turn had issued a cheque in his favour which later on bounced on account of insufficient fund. Petitioner has played fraud with the complainant. Considering the nature of allegations levelled, the materials available on record and the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The same is, therefore, rejected.

(Arvind Srivastava, J) mcv/- U T