Raju Kumar @ Rajiv Ranjan Prasad Rakesh And ANR v. State Of Bihar And ANR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.36578 of 2014 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -733 Year- 2012 Thana -AURANGABAD COMPLAINT CASE District- AURANGABAD ======================================================
1. Raju Kumar @ Rajiv Ranjan Prasad @ Rakesh, Son of Mahendra Yadav
2. Mahendra Yadav, Son of Bhagwat Yadav, both residents of village- Bulaki Bigha, P.S- Kaler, District- Arwal. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State of Bihar
2. Gurucharan Singh, son of Rampati Singh, resident of Vill-Khajanchi Bigha, P.S.-Devkund, District-Aurangabad .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, Advocate For the S t a t e : Mr. Parmanand Prasad (APP) For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Kamlendra Pd. Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA ORAL ORDER 30-10-2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
The petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.733 of 2012 for allegedly having committed the offences under Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that though an allegation has been made against the petitioners that they have received a sum of `2,50,000/- by way of cash for the purposes of securing employment of the son of the complainant, yet no employment was given to the complainant's son and on demand being made by the complainant to return the money, the
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.36578 of 2014 (6) dt.30-10-2015 2/2 petitioners declined to return the same.
Learned counsel for the complainant has today produced certain documents in the shape of entries in the passbook of the complainant, which go to show that on some dates, the complainant had been withdrawing `50,000/-. However, the learned counsel for the complainant is unable to show any further document save and except the withdrawals in the passbook that the money, in fact, was handed over to the petitioners. Considering the aforementioned facts and circumstances and also that the petitioners have no criminal antecedents, let both the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order, be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aurangabad, in connection with Complaint Case No.733 of 2012, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
(Anjana Mishra, J) PNM U T