Patna High CourtCR. MISC./5007/2021dismissed

Nikhil @ Ranjeet Verma v. The State Of Bihar

2021-08-06Mr. Justice Ashutosh Kumar2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.5007 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-10 Year-2019 Thana- ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BIHAR District- Patna ====================================================== NIKHIL @ RANJEET VERMA Son of Sri Arun Kumar Verma At present R/O at Flat No. 204, Manorama Kunj Apartment, Road No. 04, Nehru Nagar, P.S.- Patliputra, Boring Road, District - Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Navin Kumar- Advocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. A.P.P.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 06-08-2021 Heard Mr. Navin Kumar, the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned APP for the State. The petitioner seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Economic Offence P. S. Case No.10 of 2019, instituted for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 65, 66(C), 66(D) of the I. T. Act, 2000.

The accusation in the F.I.R. is that some of the shopkeepers along with their employees were reported to be fraudulently changing the I.M.E.I. number of mobile phones, thereby facilitating the commission of cyber crimes. With respect to the petitioner, it has been submitted that he is an employee of a shop owned by one Md.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.5007 of 2021(2) dt.06-08-2021 2/2 Samimuddin Alam, who on being questioned by the police informed that the petitioner is his employee and whatever has been happening in his shop is not known to him. It appears from the records that Md. Samimuddin Alam has been granted regular bail by a Bench of this Court. Regard being had to the nature of accusation against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to him. The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the Court below and seeks bail, all the above noted points shall be taken into account including that the shop owner has been granted bail, and an order shall be passed without being prejudiced by the fact that the present anticipatory bail application on his behalf has not been entertained by this Court. (Ashutosh Kumar, J) vikash/- U T