Sudhir Kumar v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.31291 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-900 Year-2018 Thana- MUZAFFARPUR SADAR DistrictMuzaffarpur ====================================================== 1.
Sudhir Kumar Son of Late Surendra Prasad Srivastava, At present resided at Singh Property near Gate No. 3, Sant Nagar, East of Kailash, P.S.- Kailash in the district of New Delhi 2.
Alok Kumar @ Alok son of Late Surendra Prasad Srivastava, At present resided at Singh Property near Gate No. 3, Sant Nagar, East of Kailash, P.S.- Kailash in the district of New Delhi 3.
Sulok Srivastave @ Sulok Kumar Son of Late Surendra Prasad Srivastava At present resided at Singh Property near Gate No. 3, Sant Nagar, East of Kailash, P.S.- Kailash in the district of New Delhi 4.
Sawan Srivastave @ Sawan Kumar Son of Late Surendra Prasad Srivastava, At present resided at Singh Property near Gate No. 3, Sant Nagar, East of Kailash, P.S.- Kailash in the district of New Delhi ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajeev Ranjan, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr.B.N.Pandey, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 10-05-2019 Heard both sides.
Petitioners apprehend their arrest in Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. Case No.900 of 2018 registered under Sections 406, 420, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The informant filed complaint case on the basis of which the present F.I.R. was registered. The informant alleged that Sandeep Kumar and Priya Srivastava came to her house and
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31291 of 2019(2) dt.10-05-2019 2/3 persuaded her to invest money in business. The informant further alleged that on the assurance of accused nos.2,3, 4 and 5 the informant gave Rs.30 lacs either by way of cash or transfer in the account of accused no.1 for investment in the business but the accused persons did not give any profit of the business to the informant.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are arrayed as accused nos.3, 4, 5 and 6 in the complaint case. There is no allegation against the petitioners that petitioners received any amount from the informant. The only allegation against the petitioners that the petitioners also assured to return the money, if invested in business. Having considered the facts and the nature of allegation made against the petitioners and the fact that the petitioners did not receive any money from the informant, the above named petitioners, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, are directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Muzaffarpur in connection with Muzaffarpur Sadar P.S. Case No.900 of
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.31291 of 2019(2) dt.10-05-2019 3/3 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438
(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Prabhat Kumar Jha, J) Harish/- U T