Subodh Kumar v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.11216 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-174 Year-2018 Thana- NAYA RAM NAGAR District- Munger ====================================================== 1.

Subodh Kumar, aged about 28 years, Male Son of Jagdish Mahto, Resident of Bhattha, Dhira Road P.S. Roh, District- Nawada. 2.

Gopal Kumar, aged about 26 years, Male Son f Dwarika Prasad, Resident of Karianana P.S. Silao, District- Nalanda.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar 2.

Uttam Kumar, aged about 37 years, Son of Bhagwat Mandal, Resident of Village- Garhi, P.O.- Nawa Garhi, P.S.- Naya Ram Nagar, District-Munger. ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Tarkeshwar Prasad Verma, Addvocate For the Opposite Party/s :

Ms. Renuka Ratnakar, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA ORAL ORDER 13-01-2022 Heard the parties through video conferencing. It appears that vide order dated 13.08.2021, the application with regard to petitioner no. 1, namely Subodh Kumar has already permitted to be withdrawn and this application is now restricted to petitioner no. 2, namely Gopal Kumar, respectively.

The petitioner no. 2 seeks bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with Naya Ram Nagar P.S. Case No. 174 of 2018 instituted for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner no. 2 submits that it

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.11216 of 2021(4) dt.13-01-2022 2/2 is Subodh Kumar, who has taken the amount of Rs. 20,00,000/- and the petitioner no. 2 has no role to play in the case. Learned counsel submits that other co-accused Abhay Kumar @ Ranjit @ Rana has already been granted bail by the trial Court. I have considered the submissions and finds that Subodh Kumar has already been arrested, his anticipatory bail application has already been dismissed. So far as petitioner no. 2, namely Gopal Kumar is concerned, the role of the petitioner no. 2 is required to be investigated in a case of committing fraud quite a huge sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- with a promise to give appointment in armed forces. The matter requires to be investigated as to quite how many other people have been defrauded. In view thereof, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner no. 2, namely Gopal Kumar. This application is dismissed.

(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Anand Kr.

U T