← Library
Patna High CourtCR. MISC./14270/2017rejected

Dr. Manishankar Chaudhary v. The State Of Bihar

2017-05-04Mr. Justice Arvind Srivastava2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.14270 of 2017 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -174 Year- 2016 Thana -DANAPUR District- PATNA ====================================================== Dr. Manishankar Chaudhary son of Late Bishwanath Chaudhary resident of village - Faridabad, P.S. Sonepur, District - Saran at Chapra, At present Jahuri Bazar, P.S. Hajipur Town, District - Vaishali at Hazipur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Nakul Kumar Jamuar For the Opposite Party/s : Smt. Meena Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA ORAL ORDER 04-05-2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Danapur P.S. Case No. 174 of 2016 registered under Sections 406 and 420 of the I.P.C. and 138 of the N.I. Act pending in the Court of A.C.J.M., Danapur.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case. It is also submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State opposed the prayer of the petitioner with submission that there is specific allegation against the petitioner. He further submits that

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14270 of 2017 (2) dt.04-05-2017 2/2 petitioner was granted anticipatory bail by the Court below on 02.08.2016 in A.B.P. No.4696 of 2016, as he was ready to pay the due amount in eight installments, but petitioner did not pay the due and as such, his bail bond was cancelled. Hence, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.

Having considered the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to allow the prayer of the petitioner for anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this application is rejected. (Arvind Srivastava, J) Shailendra/- U T