Patna High CourtCR. MISC./47406/2016dismissed

Kirti Prakash v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

2016-12-06Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.47406 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -565 Year- 2013 Thana -VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE DistrictVAISHALI(HAJIPUR) =========================================================== Kirti Prakash Son of Late Manik Chand Sinha, resident of Shanti Sadan, MohallaPokhra, Gudri Bazar, P.O. & P.S.- Hajipur, District- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The State of Bihar.

2. Ashok Kumar Mehta Son of Mahavir Singh.

3. Shrimati Sharmila Kumari Wife of Ashok Kumar Mehta, Secretary Mirza Nagar, Gramoday, Sahyog Samiti Limited, Village- Mirza Nagar, P.S.- Mahua, District- Vaishali.

4. Bhola Paswan, Chairman Mirza Nagar, Gram Udyog, Sahyog Samiti Limited, Village- Mirzanagar, P.O. & P.S. Mahua, District- Vaishali. VillageMirzanagar, P.O. & P.S. Mahua, District- Vaishali. .... .... Opposite Party/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.

For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.

=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 06-12-2016 This application seeking cancellation of bail of the Opposite Parties has been field on the ground that they are misusing the privilege of bail and being Government employees, they are doing private business. They have been made accused in Complaint Case No. 565 of 2013 lodged by the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act. They have been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by the learned Additional Sessions

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.47406 of 2016 dt.06-12-2016 2/2 Judge V, Vaishali at Hajipur. It is also the plea of the petitioner that learned Court below has wrongly granted them anticipatory bail. I have perused the order. In my view, the discretion of granting anticipatory bail, in exercise of power under section 438 Cr.P.C has been duly exercised by the Court below. Further, no case of misuse of privilege of anticipatory bail is made out on the basis of the averments made in the application.

This application has no merit and is accordingly, dismissed.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Prakash/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 15.12.2016 Transmission Date 15.12..2016