Shatrughan Prasad Ratna And ANR v. The State Of Bihar

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8376 of 2015 (2) dt.02-03-2015

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.8376 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -152 Year- 2014 Thana -PIPRA District- SUPAUL ===================================================

1. Shatrughan Prasad Ratna, son of Late Govind Pd. Ratna

2. Lakshman Prasad Ratna, son of Late Govind Pd. Ratna Both Resident of Village - Pipra, P.S. - Pipra, District - Supaul. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Pramod Mishra For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rina Sinha(APP) =================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 02-03-2015 Heard both sides.

It is submitted that petitioner no.2 namely Lakshman Prasad Ratna has already been arrested during pendency of this application.

Accordingly, this application stands dismissed as it has become infructuous only with regard to petitioner no. 2.

So far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, he apprehends his arrest in Pipra P.S. Case No.

152/2014 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The informant made an allegation that petitioner being an agent and office bearer of Sahara India Finance Company, persuaded the complainant to deposit Rs. 80/- per day for four years, Rs. 800/- and Rs. 1000/- per day in the scheme for the period

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.8376 of 2015 (2) dt.02-03-2015 of 18 months, but after maturation of the policy, the petitioner did not make any payment to the complainant.

It is submitted that petitioner did not receive any money from the complainant. The complainant did not submit any chit of papers or receipt showing deposit of money. It is beyond imagination of a common man that complainant kept on depositing money for 18 months without getting any receipt either from petitioner or from the company, even policy papers was not given to the complainant.

Considering the facts as aforesaid, the petitioner no. 1 named-above, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri S. Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, Supaul, in connection with Pipra P.S. Case No. 152/2014, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Rajeev/- (Prabhat Kumar Jha, J.) U T