Arvind Kumar @ Arvind Rai v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.42986 of 2023 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-334 Year-2017 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE DistrictPatna ====================================================== Arvind Kumar @ Arvind Rai S/O Late Lal Bihari Ray @ Laldev @ Laldev Bihari Rai R/O Village- Saraiya Main Road Ps. And P.O-Phulwari Sharif(Janipur) Dist. Patna- 801505 And Being Sole Proprietor Of M/S Rohit Tractors Having Its Office At Mustafapur, Ps. Khagaul, Danapur Cantt. Patna801503 ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

THE STATE OF BIHAR 2.

Chhote Lal S/O Munshi Ray R/O Village- Mahavir Tola, Maner Tola, Ps. And P.O- Maner, Dist. Patna- 801108 ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Saket Anand For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. Shailendra Kumar Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER 07-12-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.P.P. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant.

2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. All the accused persons named in the complaint petition along with this petitioner is said to have got deposited Rs. 1,60,000/- and handed over a tractor to the complainant but in this regard no documents were given to him and he was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42986 of 2023(4) dt.07-12-2023 2/3 forced to deposit the EMI.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Petitioner has two criminal antecedents as mentioned in Para 3 of the bail application. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the complainant has given him a cheque of Rs. 1,95,000/- in favour of the petitioner firm is dishonored and a complaint is filed against the complainant in the court below and court below took cognizance against the complainant.

5. Learned counsel for the complainant submits that he has already paid the said amount in the petitioner's firm only and therefore no payment was made to the petitioner's firm.

6. Learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the complainant opposed prayer for anticipatory bail.

7. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, let the above named petitioner, be released on bail, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of six weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned lower Court where the case is pending / successor Court in

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.42986 of 2023(4) dt.07-12-2023 3/3 connection with Complaint Case No.334 (C) of 2017, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) of the Cr.P.C. (Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Ranjeet/- U T