Devendra Kumar Mishra v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34630 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-187 Year-2013 Thana- KATEYA District- Gopalganj ====================================================== DEVENDRA KUMAR MISHRA Son of Late Jokhan Mishra Resident of Village- Chaumukha, P.S.- Vijaipur, District- Gopalganj. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Naresh Prasad For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Ram Priya Sharan Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 19-09-2019 This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Kateya P.S. Case No. 187/2013, disclosing offences under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471/34 of the Indian Penal Code. Allegation against the petitioner and other accused persons is that they approached the informant and on the pretext of sending him to Australia collected Rs. Fifteen Lakhs from the informant and others in cash and through bank deposits and some receipt showing deposit of money in his account has also been filed by the petitioner himself as Annexure 2 and 3, as such, the petitioner in collusion with others have cheated the informant and others.

Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is the teacher in the school of the informant and as some amount of the petitioner was due with the informant and

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34630 of 2019(4) dt.19-09-2019 2/2 only with a view to avoid the payment, he has come with this false case.

Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that paying slip of the deposit, shows that the amount was deposited in the account of the petitioner also and the same has been verified by the Investigation Officer during investigation and it was found that one of the accounts, in which, the amount was transferred belongs to petitoner.

Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner rather he may surrender in the court below and pray for regular bail and it is always open to the petitioner to approach the informant for amicable settlement and if any such settlement is reached, the court below shall consider the same while disposing of the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner.

This application is, accordingly, dismissed.

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