Ajit Kumar @ Ajit Kumar Ray v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.35403 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-301 Year-2022 Thana- ROHTAS COMPLAINT CASE DistrictRohtas ====================================================== 1.
Ajit Kumar @ Ajit Kumar Ray Son of Brijnath Roy @ Mukali Roy Resident of Village- Taranw, Post Office- Barawn, Police Station- Nasriganj, DistrictRohtas 2.
Brijnath Roy @ Mukali Roy Son of Anant Roy Resident of Village- Taranw, Post Office- Barawn, Police Station- Nasriganj, District- Rohtas ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Avinash Verma Son of Nand Kishore Singh Resident of VillageMadaddiganj, Post Office- Sasaram, Police Station- Sasaran (Muffasil), District- Rohtas (Bihar) ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Shashikant, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Lalan Kumar, Addl. Public Prosecutor ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 21-07-2023
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.
2. Petitioners apprehend their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under sections 406, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
3. It is alleged by the complainant that these petitioners defalcated and grabbed seven lakh rupees of the complainant in the name of giving work of "One Nation One Ration Card."
4. It is submitted that petitioner no. 1 is the brother
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.35403 of 2023(2) dt.21-07-2023 2/2 and petitioner no. 3 is the father of the co-accused Anukul Kumar against whom there is allegation that rupees five lakhs was paid in his account. Petitioners are only alleged to have been paid rupees two lakhs in cash. It is only bald allegation and in absence of any document or evidence the allegation of taking money by these petitioners cannot be believed. The petitioners have got clean antecedent.
5. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest or surrender within six weeks from today, let the petitioners, as named above, be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram in connection with Complaint Case No. 301 of 2022, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) Alok Verma/- U T