Satya Narayan Choupal v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.37495 of 2015 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -163 Year- 2015 Thana -SIMRI BAKHTIARPUR District- SAHARSA ======================================================

1. Satya Narayan Choupal son of Pitambar Choupal Resident of Village - Khajuraha, Police Station - Mahisi, District - Saharsa. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

.... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sajid Salim Khan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Indra Kumar Singh(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 17-09-2015 Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the State.

Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

The prosecution case is that on assurance by co-accused Domi Sah the informant invested Rs. 2,50,000/- in a non-banking finance company namely Pariwar Agro Farming Limited, Saharsa Branch but after the term of maturity of the investment, the informant was not given anything when it was found that the alleged finance company was fraud institution. It is alleged against the petitioner that petitioner was identifier. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that admittedly as per the F.I.R the informant made

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37495 of 2015 (2) dt.17-09-2015 2/3 investment on the persuasion of Domi Sah on 17.08.2012 when the F.I.R has been registered on 05.05.2015. The petitioner has only been roped in the present case since petitioner happens to be the brother-in-law(Sala) of Domi Sah. The informant filed Complaint Case No. 56 of 2015 on 09.01.2015 for the same cause of action levelling accusation under Sections 420, 323, 379, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, but ultimately learned Magistrate took cognizance under Sections 323, 504 of the Indian Penal Code, wherein petitioner was granted bail on 05.05.2015 and on the same day the present F.I.R was registered.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the informant that petitioner and Domi Sah misappropriated the money of the informant and have purchased the land from the money of the informant.

Considering the fact that thrust of accusation is against Domi Sah and in the complaint lodged by the informant for the same cause of action at earlier point of time the petitioner has been granted bail, let the petitioner, above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharsa in connection with Bakhtiarpur P.S. Case No. 163 of 2015,

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.37495 of 2015 (2) dt.17-09-2015 3/3 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) Shageer/- U T