Santosh Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28612 of 2022 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-731 Year-2021 Thana- MADHEPURA District- Madhepura ====================================================== SANTOSH CHAUDHARY Son of Nand Kishore Chaudhary Resident of Tiwari Tola Saharsa, Ward No.- 31, P.S.- Saharsa, District - Saharsa ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

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

Mr.Ravindra Kumar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATYAVRAT VERMA ORAL ORDER 29-08-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Ravindra Kumar, learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant alleges that he is a proprietor of M.B. Enterprises engaged in sale and purchase of grains, further he loaded grains worth Rs. 7,21,097/- on a truck, the details of which was provided by the petitioner who is owner of Jay Bharat Transport, for being transported to M/s. Amrit Bhog Agro Private Limited, it is next alleged that the driver of the truck even took Rs. 25,000/- towards fuel charges but the grain did not reach the destination and the mobile of the driver was switched off and the petitioner also did not disclose anything

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28612 of 2022(2) dt.29-08-2022 2/3 when he was informed about the same.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a person with clean antecedent and has been falsely implicated in the present case, it is next submitted that petitioner is the owner of Jay Bharat Transport and acts as commission agent further the truck does not belong to the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that since the informant had approached the petitioner, as such he had given the details of the truck and for which he received commission, learned counsel thus submits that petitioner basically is a commission agent and had absolutely no role in the present occurrence moreso the present occurrence has even brought bad name to the business of the petitioner which no prudent businessman will ever want to lose his credibility by resorting to such nefarious activities. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner above-named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.28612 of 2022(2) dt.29-08-2022 3/3 each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Madhepura P.S. Case No. 731 of 2021 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Satyavrat Verma, J) Rishi/- U T