Ramchandra Singh v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.44793 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-312 Year-2017 Thana- JAMUI District- Jamui ====================================================== RAMCHANDRA SINGH Son of Late Shital Singh Resident of Dundo, P.S.- Jamui, District- Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

THE STATE OF BIHAR Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Satya Prakash Parasar, Adv.

For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Dr. Kumar Uday Pratap, APP For Informant : Smt. Poonam Singh, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 18-10-2019 This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Jamui Town P.S. Case No. 312 of 2017, disclosing offences under Sections 406, 420, 431, 504 and 506. Allegation as per F.I.R. is that informant has given three lakhs to the petitioner towards purchase of a piece of land by three different cheques, which were encashed in the account of the petitioner, however, the petitioner neither executed the sale deed nor returned the money. Submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the informant has deposited the amount in the account of petitioner on his own and the said money has already been returned to the informant by the petitioner, though he does not have any proof.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.44793 of 2019(5) dt.18-10-2019 2/2 Heard learned A.P.P. as well as learned counsel for the informant. They have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that he has cheated the informant by taking Rs. Three lakhs for execution of sale deed but neither he executed the sale deed nor returned the money and the in the court below he has taken different plea that ti is the petitioner, who has earlier given money money to the informant, which was returned by the informant and here he is taking the different plea. Having heard both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. However, if the petitioner is ready to return even the 50% of the amount, the learned court below shall consider the aforesaid aspect of the matter, while considering the prayer of regular bail of the petitioner.

This application is, accordingly, disposed of. (Vinod Kumar Sinha, J) sunilkumar/- U