Asim Kumar Das And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47528 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -1854 Year- 2014 Thana -GOPALGANJ COMPLAINT CASE DistrictGOPALGANJ ======================================================

1. Asim Kumar Das, S/o Late Prabhash Kumar Das @ Pravash Kumar Das,

2. Piyali Das W/o Asim Kumar Das D/o Sri Satya Charan Karar @ Satya Charan Das, Both are R/o 4/2 Puratan Shaire Lane P.S.- Chapderjee Hat, District- Hawrah (W.B.).

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Laxami Sah S/o Dhanai Sah, R/o Vill.- Barari Jagdish, P.S.- Uchakagaon, District- Gopalganj.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Sri Uday Chand Prasad, A.P.P. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 16-08-2018 Heard the parties. The petitioners seek anticipatory bail in connection with C. Case No. 1854 of 2014, corresponding Trial No. 81 of 2017, registered for offences punishable under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code. As per F.I.R. the petitioners are named in the F.I.R. and allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners inaugurated a Non Banking Company namely, INFINITY REAL CON. LTD and they were collecting money as Fixed Deposit on the pretext of providing them as maturity amount and collected more than amount Rs. 1, 33, 73, 821 and without information the customers,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47528 of 2018 (2) dt.16-08-2018 2/2 they fled away.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case and the petitioners have no knowledge about deposited money in the account of company. It is also submitted that the petitioners are only share holders of the Company and they sold their share in the year, 2010.

Heard learned A.P.P., who opposes the prayer for bail. However, in the facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners and if the petitioners surrender before the Court below and make prayer for regular bail, the same shall be considered on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.

With this above observation and that the petitioner No. 2 is a lady, this application is disposed of, if possible on the same day.

(Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) Sudha/- U T