Brij Bhushan Singh @ Braj Bhushan Singh v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.53226 of 2024 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-973 Year-2023 Thana- JAHANABAD District- Jehanabad ====================================================== 1.
Brij Bhushan Singh @ Braj Bhushan Singh Son Of Ramanuj Singh R/OPali- Jehanabad, Opposite Sbi, Ward-7, Teni Bigha, P.S. And Distt.- JEHANABAD, Shahbazpur, Bihar-804417 2.
Rajiv Kumar Singh Son Of Surendra Kumar Singh R.O- H. No. 78/1, Mayapur/Dvc, Po- Talbagicha, P.S.- Kharagpur, Dist.-WEST Madinapur, West Bengal 721306 3.
Khushbu @ Khushbu Kumari W/O- Rajiv Kumar Singh R.O- H. No. 78/1, Mayapur/Dvc, Po- Talbagicha, P.S.-KHARAGPUR Local, Distt.-WEST Madinapur, West -721306BENGAL ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Vidya Kumari W/o Brajesh Sharma R/o village- Badhauna,P.O.- Tej Bigha, P.S.- Bhelwar (Kako), Distt.- Jehanabad ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Abhinay Priyadarshi For the Opposite Party/s :
Mr. Binod Kumar ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. SONI SHRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 17-06-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State. No one appears on behalf of the opposite party no. 2.
2. The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in a case registered for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
3. The allegation in the First Information Report is that of misappropriation of a total sum of Rs. 17,00,000/- during course of business for opening an E-vehicle showroom in Jehanabad.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53226 of 2024(8) dt.17-06-2025 2/3
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the entire allegations made in the First Information Report are false and as a matter of fact, it would be evident from a bare perusal of the FIR itself that the petitioners and the informant were in a business relationship and there is a case and counter case between the parties. The case filed by the petitioner no. 2 which was earlier in point of time has also been brought on record. It has further been submitted that so far as petitioner no. 1 is concerned, he is nowhere connected in the entire business transaction and he has also been made an accused in the present case. Further submission of the petitioners is that the present case arises out of a purely civil and commercial dispute which is private in nature and hence, no case under Sections 406, 420 and 120B is made out against the petitioners. The petitioners, however, undertake to cooperate with the investigating agency and they have no criminal antecedent.
5. Learned APP for the State has opposed the application for anticipatory bail.
6. Considering all the above mentioned facts and circumstances, let the above named petitioners in the event of their arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of four weeks from today, be enlarged on bail on
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.53226 of 2024(8) dt.17-06-2025 3/3 furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned court below where the case is pending/successor court in connection with Jehanabad P.S. Case No. 973 of 2023, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C./482(2) of the B.N.S.S.
(Soni Shrivastava, J) devendra/- U T