Ranjan Yadav v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.51291 of 2019 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-94 Year-2019 Thana- BHAGALPUR KOTWALI DistrictBhagalpur ====================================================== RANJAN YADAV S/o Siyaram Yadav @ Ram Swaroop Yadav R/o villageHousing Board Colony, P.S.- Barari, District- Bhagalpur ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1.
The State of Bihar 2.
Anjali Jha In-Charge Branch Manager, Uco Bank, Tilkamanjhi, P.S.- Tilkamanjhi, District- Bhagalpur Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr.Rajive Ranjan Singh For the Bank :
Mr.Ranjeet Kumar Pandey For the State :
Mr.Abhay Kumar Roy, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN ORAL ORDER 20-08-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.
2. The petitioner apprehends his arrest for the offences alleged under Sections 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 138 of the N.I. Act registered in connection with Kotwali (Tilkamanjhi) P.S. Case No. 94 of 2019.
3. It is submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in connection with outstanding dues of Rs. 8,56,783/- with interest for which recovery proceedings before the Certificate Officer had been initiated. It is submitted that the petitioner has already deposited Rs. 1,50,000/- and expresses his readiness to make payment of the remaining amount in instalments. The petitioner claims clean antecedents.
4. Learned APP assisted by learned counsel for the Uco Bank appear and have been heard.
5. Learned counsel for the bank opposes the petition
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.51291 of 2019(2) dt.20-08-2019 2/2 submitting that the petitioner clearly have no intention to make payment and is merely raising the plea as a means for obtaining favourable orders. It is submitted that on issuance of warrant by the Certificate Officer, the petitioner was arrested, whereafter he made payment of Rs. 1,50,000/. The petitioner was granted bail on depositing cheque for Rs. 2,80,000/- before the learned Court in partial payment of the dues, but the cheque subsequently bounced.
6. Having regard to the nature of accusations and gravity of offence alleged, this Court is not inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The anticipatory bail petition stands dismissed.
(Vikash Jain, J) Chandran/- U T