Purushottam Jha @ Prusuttam Jha v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.9799 of 2018 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -50 Year- 2016 Thana -LODIPUR District- BHAGALPUR ======================================================

1. Purushottam Jha @ Prusuttam Jha S/o Late Udit Narayan Jha, R/o Mohalla- Nasrathkhani, P.S.- Lalmatia (Narthnagar), District- Bhagalpur. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Smt. Anita Kumari Singh ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL ORDER 19-02-2018 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State.

This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Lodipur PS case no. 50 of 2016 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471/34 of Indian Penal Code.

The case of the prosecution is that the informant herein namely Sapna Kumari was convinced by one Sanjay Kumar that he would provide employment to her in the Child Welfare Department and for the same, she should pay a sum of Rs. 6,75,000/- out of which, Rs. 2 lacs was paid in advance, however the employment was not provided and the cheque given by the Sanjay Kumar by way of refund of the amount to the

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9799 of 2018 (2) dt.19-02-2018 2/3 informant also got bounced. Thereafter, the said Sanjay Kumar is said to have been arrested and he disclosed that while the petitioner was negotiating for providing employment for his sister-in-law, he had told the petitioner to bring some clients so that they can earn money.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that only because the petitioner has become the seizure list witness to the incriminating articles seized at the time of the arrest of the main accused Sanjay Kumar, the said Sanjay Kumar had taken the name of the petitioner without any complicity on his part in the alleged crime. It is further submitted that the petitioner has a clean antecedent and even if the allegations leveled against him are taken on the face value, no case is made out against him. Having regards to the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it fit and appropriate to admit the petitioner to the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the abovenamed petitioner, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order, is directed to be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M. IV, Bhagalpur in connection with Lodipur

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.9799 of 2018 (2) dt.19-02-2018 3/3 PS case no. 50 of 2016 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) rinkee/- U T